Authors Guild: Amazon's Hypocrisy is Breathtaking

[JMcEntegart]

The Authors Guild has responded to Amazon's opposition of the Google Books deal, calling the etailer's reason for objecting "hypocritical."

Authors Guild: Amazon's Hypocrisy is Breathtaking : Read more

 

[d_kuhn]

Sounds on the surface like a great idea, but it would definitely put a crimp in Amazon's current virtual lock on the market.

If there's not some hidden 'gotcha' in the idea, it's a win-win for us. We get out of print books available at libraries (supporting libraries too... another good thing) and Amazon gets its nose tweaked (gotta keep those big companies in line, they're quick to get greedy once in the drivers seat of a market).

 

[False_Dmitry_II]

How the F do you sell a digital download at a LOSS!?!

 

[chaohsiangchen]

I think Author's Guild should investigate the new ways of distributing books and how to protect interests of their members, instead of whining on how unfair and hypocritical Amazon and Google are. They are greedy, and so are you. It's only a matter of time before Author's Guild to become RIAA or MPAA-like entity.

I, thus, preempted them by reading books written by famous people passed away for at least 100 years.

 

[jeraldjunkmail]

[citation][nom]False_Dmitry_II[/nom]How the F do you sell a digital download at a LOSS!?![/citation]

By paying royalties to authors and publishers on a per copy basis... Lose money now to take over a future profitable market.

 

[tektek]

Time for the authors guild to write a book about amazon.. and a screenplay.. i forsee Tom Cruize and Mel Gibson as Amazon CEO's..

 

[grieve]

[citation][nom]tektek[/nom]Time for the authors guild to write a book about amazon.. and a screenplay.. i forsee Tom Cruize and Mel Gibson as Amazon CEO's..[/citation]
Comming this summer..
Tom Cruize, Plays Amazon CEO.... Mel Gibson, anti-Semitic, drunk driver on a vigilante justice crime spree.

When two worlds collide... Tom just wants to sell books to innocent children via the internet, Mel wants to burn books and preach his Catholic ways.

 

[Guest]

"It offers to make millions upon millions of out-of-print books available for free online viewing at 16,500 public library buildings and more than 4,000 colleges and universities, and that's a great thing for readers, students and scholars."

*or* I could just borrow one of the hard copies that are *already* available for free at thousands of libraries and universities. Do they really think the demand for out-of-print books is so high that people can't wait their turn to check them out from the library?

 

[Platypus]

[citation][nom]sillyargument[/nom]*or* I could just borrow one of the hard copies that are *already* available for free at thousands of libraries and universities. Do they really think the demand for out-of-print books is so high that people can't wait their turn to check them out from the library?[/citation]
Newsflash: Your local library likely does not have millions upon millions of books.

*points out the obvious* So this would be better.

 

[Netherscourge]

When two "monopolies" are competing with each other, they are no longer monopolies.

 

[Guest]

The hidden Gotcha is that Google's agreement with the writers guild encompasses a lot (i.e. Majority) of books that the US writers guild has no authority to speak for and is the reason the EU is looking at Google's plans very closely,because this deal gives Google a virtual monopoly on out of print books.

The Writers Guild is complaining about Amazon wanting the same thing as Google (ant yet its O.K. apparently for Google to do it. The only reason the guild is behind this is the almighty $ the US Guild writers get their pound of flesh, but they don't care about writers outside the US.

If this agreement allowed anyone to do the same thing as they are proposing Google should be allowed to do,then I'd be in favor of it, but of course that would remove the main motivation for Google to take this deal and probably reduce the money the guild recieves.

 

[joebob2000]

[citation][nom]grieve[/nom]Comming this summer.. Tom Cruize, Plays Amazon CEO.... Mel Gibson, anti-Semitic, drunk driver on a vigilante justice crime spree.When two worlds collide... Tom just wants to sell books to innocent children via the internet, Mel wants to burn books and preach his Catholic ways.[/citation]

This makes SO little sense... I wanted to laugh, but out of my mouth came a stream of question marks.

 

[grieve]

[citation][nom]joebob2000[/nom]This makes SO little sense... I wanted to laugh, but out of my mouth came a stream of question marks.[/citation]
Its a cheesy TV commercial for a movie... What don't you understand?

 

[one-shot]

What about the Film Actors Guild???

 

[False_Dmitry_II]

[citation][nom]jeraldjunkmail[/nom]By paying royalties to authors and publishers on a per copy basis... Lose money now to take over a future profitable market.[/citation]

Then the royalties are too high. Last time I looked there was a $5 difference between a free to make download and a real life has-to-be-printed copy. Just like with downloadable music, the difference should be higher because there is no production cost.

 

[Guest]

@Platypus:
No single branch would, but there is a library every 5-10 miles where I live. Also, methinks 'millions upon millions' is a bit of an exaggeration. The point was that it's a silly argument to use to justify making an exclusive deal with Google.

Another question is whether or not you'd be able to take the e-books home. If you are forced to stay at the library in order to read them, then hard copies are a better choice unless you are just doing a bit of research.

 

[xaira]

though its admirable, havent you learned, if you fight google you loose, thats just how it is, deal with it.

 

[Major7up]

Here's the way I see it...this is a huge opportunity for a win-win for both Google and Amazon. Here's what they need to do:
1) Google provides an ad-supported version of the e-book at no cost to the consumer
2) Amazon provides an ad-free paid copy

Google can even list Amazon as the preferred or vendor of choice in the first ad spot (or only spot for buying it if they work a deal). In this manner Google gets ad revenue (even from Amazon who has to pay for their ad) and Amazon still gets sales. Amazon won't be the exclusive provider, but they can promote each other. I often pay for things to avoid ads, especially if the cost is reasonable. They need to get Authors and publishers on board with an economical pricing scheme though.

 

[gorehound]

i never buy nor will i ever support digital files.
NO THANKS !!!!

i buy vinyl,cd's,dvd's,hard cover 1st edition books....i own physical media.if i want to "digitize" something i can do it myself.

 

[Major7up]

[citation][nom]gorehound[/nom]i never buy nor will i ever support digital files.NO THANKS !!!!i buy vinyl,cd's,dvd's,hard cover 1st edition books....i own physical media.if i want to "digitize" something i can do it myself.[/citation]
I hate to break it to ya but you won't have that option forever. I used to feel similarly (I wanted a physical copy and would rip it myself) but then I realized that I like not having to store and move tons of books and cd's (and cassettes). Now I have an archive of all music and movies I own and got rid of the cd's and dvd's etc. I would love to do the same with magazines and books I have (like National Geo's). Not only do I not have to store and move them, but when I leave this earth, no one else will either.