[wordup] Authors urge Amazon to limit sales of used books

[Adam Shand]

OMFG.  Jesus Christ people, when did America become the place where
anything which detracts from your *potential* profits is bad?  Oh yeah,
years ago.  Never mind, stupid question.

Fuck.  I had something witty written up about creating the MCFIP (Middle
Class Financial Incentive Program) which would involve incarcerating the
rich because they're presence inhibits my ability to climb up the
social/financial ladder.  But I overwrote it and it was stupid so now
you just get this.  Yay me.

Adam.

Via: politech at politechbot.com
Subject: FC: Authors urge Amazon to limit sales of used books
Date: 10 Apr 2002 21:34:06 -0400

An excellent example of the diverging economic interests of authors
and readers, with Amazon caught in the middle...

Relevant links:
http://www.authorsguild.org/pramazon1200.html 

News coverage:
http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,51676,00.html 
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/10/technology/10BOOK.html 

-Declan

---

Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 16:40:36 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
From: "Matthew G. Saroff" <msaroff at pobox.com>
To: <declan at well.com>
Subject: I don't believe this.....I'm on Amazon's side

	Authors are trying to bully Amazon.
> Group blasts Amazon's used-book sales

> By "aggressively promoting" sales of used books on its site, Amazon.com
> is snatching money out of authors' pockets, says a group representing
> 8,000 published authors.
http://news.com.com/2100-1017-880022.html

	I hate it when I have to be on Amazon's side.  When you are done
with a book, it's your right to give it away, sell it, or feed it to your
pet Python.
-- 
Matthew G. Saroff

---

Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:39:49 -0600
To: pschroeder at publishers.org
From: Tim Lieberman <tim at electricmindcontrol.net>
Subject: Amazon & Used Books - bad practice; legislation not the answer
Cc: politech at politechbot.com, w-politics at two.pairlist.net

Patricia,

I read with interest today's NYT Article "Online Sales Of Used Books Draw 
Protest".  I wholeheartedly agree that your organization should be pressuring
Amazon to change their used-book system.  I will defend your right to advocate
for authors and publishers when members of the retail industry are hurting you.

I'll also agree that Amazon is a sleazy company, and I have boycotted them for
several years due to their "business method patent" philosophy.  I'm sure
you remember the one-click ordering patent fiasco a few years back.

In the article you are quoted thusly:

"The biggest problem is that it is legal, I think. I wring my hands, pound 
my desk and say, `Aargh.'"

I must object to this statement.  Legislation banning the sale of used books
is a terrible idea.  There are several reasons I can think of.

	1) The current push by many in the entertainment/publishing industry
	   for stronger, if not draconian, copyright expansions already has
	   too much momentum.  Looking for legislation to remove or weaken
	   the first-sale doctrine is very likely to anger many, many people.

		Perhaps it would be palatable if publishers would guarantee
	   a consumer's satisfaction with a particular book.  If I think the
	   writing is poor, the author is dumb, or just don't like the book,
	   you'll take it back.  Until you're ready to do that, I for one
	   (as an individual) want to be able to resell the junk you've 	   sold 
me, either to an individual, or to a dealer of used books.

		The existence of dealers is necessary, as the logistics of
	   finding a buyer for a poor publication are considerable.  If I've
	   already given your author my time (which I now feel has been
	   wasted), I certainly object to having to waste more time looking
	   for an individual buyer.
	
	   	I digress.  Simply put, the idea of criminalizing the sale
	   of used books is a slap in the face of public interest.

	2) Copyright is a "granted" right, my right to sell what I've bought
	   is a "protected" (Natural?) right.  The language of the U.S.
	   Constitution is quite clear.  Copyright is a means to an end,
	   that end being the "promotion of the useful arts and sciences".
	   The preservation of the People's rights is an end in itself.  My
	   right to sell what I've purchased must override the (artificial,
	   granted, means-to-a-noble-end) right of authors and publishers
	   to control their works.

	3) The same arguments used about used books could too easily be
	   applied to libraries.  I don't think I need to elaborate here.

	4) The Used Book Market has definate benefits for both consumers and
	   your industry.  Many of these goods are also provided by libararies.
	   I've often check out a book, or bought an inexpensive used copy
	   in order to evaluate an author.  If the evaluation was positive,
	   I've purchased other works by that author new.  Sometimes I even
	   buy a new copy (sometimes hardcover) of the work that I initially
	   bought used.


	Please understand that I respect your objection to Amazon's policy.
They are biting the hand that feeds them.  Use any market leverage you can
muster to defeat the practice and protect the interests of those that you 
represent.  But please, please, don't start trying to abridge the freedoms 
of all Americans.  It's a simple case of just and unjust means to an end.

Thanks for Reading,

Tim Lieberman
Boulder, CO

---



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Politech dinner in SF on 4/16: http://www.politechbot.com/events/cfp2002/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------