Hacker News Reader

Comment by funkyy | Hacker News Reader

I think Amazon will go with "Dont like it, dont publish to it" strategy. Amazon is platform that allows common folk to get access to whole library in their own home.

I love when writers say they would love for people to have better access to literature, but when Amazon shows up with their accessible platform it turns out its back to basics - all about money. Top writers maybe dont get paid as much as with regular publishers, but:

a) they do not need to publish to Amazon

b) if they are really about art and accessibility they will be happy with it

c) I know bills in cities like NYC are high, but hey - you decided to write books for living. You took this route with all pros but also with cons...

View on HN

Selling ebooks is just not that complicated; it's an open question what value amazon brings to the market (in that sense, it's the exact same problem as Spotify.) If the top publishers jumped ship and started selling ebooks directly, I'd follow. The vast majority of the self-published stuff on amazon is utter shit, demonstrating both the value of a publisher as a filter and the value of editors. Obviously there are gems, but the majority is awful. Also, to be blunt: if you think that, were amazon to put the publishers out of business and therefore gain direct publishing control over most ebooks, they wouldn't take a hatchet to writers' pay, you're incredibly stupid.

Thinking that (1) writers wanting people to have more access to literature, and (2) working in their self-interest to be paid are incompatible is silly. Unless you're voluntarily giving up your salary so that more people can have access to software (or whatever else it is you do).

If you think that selling ebooks is simple and Amazon doesn't bring anything to the market, then why aren't publishers just selling ebooks directly?

(a) Many do. In fact, many old paperbacks had order forms in the back for other books directly from the publisher. Been doing it forever. On the other hand, you will pay full cover price, which for ebooks means full hard-/paper-back price. Because...

(b) The publisher's other retail markets (Barnes & Noble, Wal-Mart, other distributors and bookstores) would crap out a literal brick, which they would then apply to the publisher, if the publisher started competing with them.

Doesn't Amazon make it relatively difficult to use alternative stores with its e-readers (particularly the non-Android ones)?

Sure, but here's the thing: Spotify is still the best parallel. Amazon's weakness is they don't own the content everyone wants; they have to license it and there is no mandatory licensing. The big 5 publishers could up and stop letting amazon sell ebooks, form their own ebook selling consortium, and switch the vast majority of customers over. Or hell, buy B&N for the same reason.

I'm pretty sure that kind of organized industry-wide boycott would run afoul of antitrust laws — and if it weren't organized and industry-wide, the publishers who defected would probably just be shooting themselves in the foot, because they would not be able to get everyone to buy a new e-reader that couldn't read any of their existing books.

Yet Spotify exists. Are you aware of who owns a big chunk of it?

You can also put non-amazon books -- in formats such as pdf -- on kindle. It's not as simple as buying through amazon, but it's very doable. Further, everyone who owns a smartphone or a tablet can just download a reader app.

No, it is trivially easy to put non-DRMed books onto a kindle.

One publisher who I find particularly reader-friendly is Baen. If I buy a book from them, it goes into my account there so I can download it at any time (and any number of times) in the future, in a wide variety of formats. Since I do my reading on a kindle, I click the send to kindle link and it pops up next time I turn on my kindle's wireless.

c) Yeah, what assholes deciding to write books for a living. Fuck them. Should have written HFT algos instead.

You can collect rocks or do equally other valueless things. Doesn't mean you "deserve" money.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com