×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Author Claims Apple Won't Carry Her ebook Because It Mentions Amazon

samzenpus posted about a year and a half ago | from the not-in-our-store dept.

Apple 332

martiniturbide writes "Author Holly Lisle tried to publish her guide How To Think Sideways Lesson 6: How To Discover (Or Create) Your Story's Market at Apple's iBooks store. She says it was rejected first by Apple because it had 'live links' to Amazon. After she removed the links, it was rejected again because according to her: 'The problem is the CONTENT. You can't mention Amazon in your lesson.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

332 comments

The first rule of controlling a market... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811251)

shut down discussion.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811459)

The third rule of selling self-help books: make yourself seem like a plucky underdog being trampled on by a huge, faceless corporation.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811959)

The third rule of selling self-help books: make yourself seem like a plucky underdog being trampled on by a huge, faceless corporation.

A very popular corporation?

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (5, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812453)

Popular for some, the devil for others... Rest assured some will cry bloody murder, others will call it a slander campaign... be it as it may, everyone's talking about a book nobody would have bothered to even think of taking a look at.

Mission accomplished.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811509)

shut down discussion.

Which is why there needs to be a law against censoring content in a public marketplace by a public company.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (0, Troll)

Karlt1 (231423) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811883)

So does that mean that the Disney Store should be forced to sell Debbie Does Dallas if they sell books by other authors?

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (-1, Troll)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811917)

You mean if I own a religious bookstore, I have to sell the Kama Sutra sex manual, "On the Road" which encourages drug use, and other vile filth? No sir. This is a free country and I should be able to decide what I wish to sell in my private business. It is not right that I should have to be forced out-of-a-job because of some stupid law that obliges me to sell items that are sinful.

Apple can censor whatever they want. This woman can publish her book in another store... like amazon. Or my store. Or her own store (or website).

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (5, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812075)

So does that mean that the Disney Store should be forced to sell Debbie Does Dallas if they sell books by other authors?

You mean if I own a religious bookstore, I have to sell the Kama Sutra sex manual, "On the Road" which encourages drug use, and other vile filth? No sir. This is a free country and I should be able to decide what I wish to sell in my private business. It is not right that I should have to be forced out-of-a-job because of some stupid law that obliges me to sell items that are sinful.

See, the problem here is you're setting up a straw man. Nobody is "forcing" Apple to sell anything. Nobody is forcing Apple out of business. Nobody is even pushing this private business to do anything it does not want.

Instead, this woman, this author, is simply pointing out the kind of douchebag behavior that Apple has increasingly made its business model. Success through suppression of competition. Success through censorship, through lawsuits, through crushing competition. Success through stepping on small business people.

This author is not talking about lawsuits or "there oughta be a law". She's just putting the information out there and letting people see for themselves why so many people are saying it's just not cool to own Apple products any more.

I really don't think you're dramatic introduction of religious freedom and "sinfulness" is applicable or adds anything of value to this discussion.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40812413)

So you were unable to grasp his entire point: As a religious seller, he should have the choice of selling those wares he believes in.

Just because you have a different worldview and fret over that someone can have a different one, doesn't subtract an iota from his valid point.

Keyword: tainted

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1, Informative)

Deep Esophagus (686515) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811697)

How on earth is this censorship, or controlling a market? Unless Apple can stop her from distributing her book in any form in any marketplace, all they've done is stop somebody from going into Walmart and putting up "Shop at K-Mart" signs.

People keep throwing around the word "censorship" like they think they know what it means, but it's obvious they don't. Censorship is when the government restricts your speech. Even if every single one of her claims is true, she is not being censored.

Disclaimer:I am most certainly not an Apple fanboy; I have loathed Apple ever since Woz left. I think they have horrific business practices, terrible design, and don't get me started about proprietary-everything with no user servicable parts inside. Despite all that, I think this is a non-story.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (3, Interesting)

maxwell demon (590494) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811753)

How on earth is this [...] controlling a market?

So you don't think ebooks on iOS devices are a market?
Or you don't think Apple controls it?

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1)

Karlt1 (231423) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811907)

You're perfectly capable of buying a book from Amazon for the Kindle and using the Kindle app. Even if Apple did remove the Kindle app,you can read a kindle book within a browser.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1, Interesting)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812021)

I know Apple don't control it. So would you if you actually knew what you were talking about. You can put ebooks from any number of ebook stores on any iOS device.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811869)

Censorship is when the government restricts your speech.

No it is not. Censorship applies when any type of authority restricts your speech.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (-1)

Culture20 (968837) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811909)

How on earth is this censorship [...]?

Because it's censorship. Apple is censoring the content.

People keep throwing around the word "censorship" like they think they know what it means, but it's obvious they don't. Censorship is when the government restricts your speech. Even if every single one of her claims is true, she is not being censored.

No, censorship is when anyone (government, media, newspaper delivery boy) restricts dissemination of information that they object to people knowing (tiananmen square, acta, letters from the newspaper company about not giving delivery boys tips). When government does it, it's government censorship.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (3, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812065)

Because it's censorship. Apple is censoring the content.

If you think an individual store choosing not to sell something is censorship, then you've demonstrated you don't know what censorship means.

No, censorship is when anyone (government, media, newspaper delivery boy) restricts dissemination of information that they object to people knowing (tiananmen square, acta, letters from the newspaper company about not giving delivery boys tips).

Apple is not restricting dissemination. They have no power to do so. Authors do not have the right to have their books sold in any store they chose. Declining to stock a book is not censorship, otherwise ALL bookstores are censoring every book they don't stock.

The first rule of reading comprehension... (3, Insightful)

Archfeld (6757) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812429)

You need to use a dictionary more often. Just because you don't like what someone else is posting doesn't make it incorrect. Apple is censoring content. It is their right to do so and sell what they wish via their marketplace, unless their censorship is based on religion, sex, or race, but just because it is legal doesn't change the fact...

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (2)

Culture20 (968837) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812445)

If they refuse to stock a book because of its content they are censoring that content within their store. Do you ever self-censor yourself when talking to people? Did the government force you to do that via mind control? If not, then not all censorship is government-caused. Nor is it universal (I doubt you censor the same things around your mother as you do around your friends).

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1)

Intropy (2009018) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811921)

Censorship doesn't mean the government is doing, just someone with power or authority on a given arena. Apple has authority and power over their bookstore so they are able to censor content on it.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (5, Informative)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811935)

People keep throwing around the word "censorship" like they think they know what it means, but it's obvious they don't. Censorship is when the government restricts your speech. Even if every single one of her claims is true, she is not being censored.

Well, Merriam-Webster's site says this.

Censorship:

1. The institution or practice of censoring.

Censor:

To examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable; also: to suppress or delete as objectionable.

Nothing about the term requires that it be applied to the government. So, you're wrong. And while Apple certainly has the legal right to censor content that appears in their marketplace, it's pretty shitty of them to do so, and people are absolutely right to call them out for it (provided that the claims are true).

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812283)

Basically what you mean is that the word is nowhere near as bad as it sounded in the original context.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812385)

"Bad" is entirely subjective. I don't really consider censorship by someone in Apple's position that much more preferable to government censorship. It is still better, but not by some large margin. Anyways, the original context didn't misuse the word. If people connote things that are much worse than the word merits, that's not the original author's fault.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812437)

If people connote things that are much worse than the word merits, that's not the original author's fault.

Yes, it is.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811975)

>>>How on earth is this censorship, or controlling a market?

It is private censorship within the small area that Apple controls. And no the term does not only apply to a government. It can apply to private companies, or churches, or even your own home (you censor your kids from saying "fuck you"). Also cable TV when the private channels censor the nudity from movies.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (1)

hawguy (1600213) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812449)

People keep throwing around the word "censorship" like they think they know what it means, but it's obvious they don't. Censorship is when the government restricts your speech. Even if every single one of her claims is true, she is not being censored.

Where is censorship defined so narrowly?

From m-w.com:

Censorship: the institution, system, or practice of censoring

Censor: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable

From Wikipedia:

Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. It can be done by governments and private organizations or by individuals who engage in self-censorship. It occurs in a variety of different contexts including speech, books, music, films and other arts, the press, radio, television, and the Internet for a variety of reasons including national security, to control obscenity, child pornography, and hate speech, to protect children, to promote or restrict political or religious views, to prevent slander and libel, and to protect intellectual property. It may or may not be legal. Many countries provide strong protections against censorship by law, but none of these protections are absolute and it is frequently necessary to balance conflicting rights in order to determine what can and cannot be censored.

(emphasis mine)

If some portion of her potential market purchase content only through Apple's store, then she *is* being censored. Sure, there may be other workarounds (they can install a Kindle App, they can buy it in printed form, etc), but if Apple refuses to sell it because they don't like the content, they are censoring her.

Re:The first rule of controlling a market... (4, Interesting)

mk1004 (2488060) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812011)

A quick search of apple inc in books on amazon returns plenty of results. Some are obviously positive and others negative about Apple, and some are probably neutral. The author suggests that Apple doesn't allow mentions of competitors, or at lest Amazon, in their bookstore. So which of the two, if either, is evil?

"professional" distributor (2, Insightful)

Cederic (9623) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811277)

I like the way her site states

I can no longer recommend Apple as a professional distributor

I don't see Apple acting as a professional distributor. Quite why people still support this abusive organisation I really struggle to understand.

Re:"professional" distributor (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811491)

Because what is the alternatives?

Linux? How many decades has it been for Linux taking over the world's desktops?

Still waiting...

Apple has a working product, Windows is still copying that working product and it is everywhere... Linux is in the corporate data dungeons and spotty nerds computers (who also use Windows for gaming).

Linux still won't be on the desktop in the next decade either, we have no viable alternative for the masses.

Re:"professional" distributor (2)

ozmanjusri (601766) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811789)

Because what is the alternatives?

Linux? How many decades has it been for Linux taking over the world's desktops?

Still waiting...

I'm not. I've been happily and professionally using it for more than a decade.

  Linux is more than capable enough to be used on the desktop, but will never be selected for the role when there is an established monoculture locking people in.

Get rid of proprietary file formats and APIs, open the world to heterogeneous business computing and allow for real competition in the market, the way capitalism is supposed to work and you'll see a different result.

Re:"professional" distributor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40812339)

I'm a happy desktop linux user as well.

I don't need the rest of the world to use it on their desktop for me to be happy.

Linux is King in server-land, supercomputer-land, Hollywood-land, ebook-land, New-Phone-Land, embedded-land, hacker-land, etc...
It doesn't need to be King of everything to be successful does it?

Re:"professional" distributor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811995)

You'd be surprised.

The main problem that's been slowing down Linux was access to games, however this is changing rapidly, for example with Steam recently announcing that they're making their games available for Linux; there's also a large increase in new games being made available for Linux.
Sure, it's not very easy for the average person to install Linux (many people don't know what an OS is or why they should upgrade/switch), but once Linux can run most games and thus be as performant as Windows you'll see PC manufacturers offering it as an option on their machines, and when people are given the choice between a $100+ OS or free Linux, they'll pick Linux most of the time.

Re:"professional" distributor (0)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811633)

Because not everyone is as gullible as you, accepting blindly the tall tales an author makes as PR to sell her book.

Re:"professional" distributor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811671)

The funny part is, she's obviously not an expert on "How To Discover (Or Create) Your Story's Market at Apple's iBooks store", to begin with if she can't even get the thing onto the iBooks store.

extraordinary claims (5, Insightful)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811295)

Require extraordinary proof.

There are plenty of iBooks already that mention Amazon.

We have one person making a blind accusation here.

Re:extraordinary claims (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811381)

Require extraordinary proof.

There are plenty of iBooks already that mention Amazon.

We have one person making a blind accusation here.

Maybe you can give us some examples? ...

Re:extraordinary claims (2, Insightful)

newcastlejon (1483695) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811437)

Maybe you can give us some examples? ...

The burden of proof is hers. Until she tells the world exactly what Apple told her I'm inclined to treat this as a publicity stunt; all TFA has is her side of the story.

Re:extraordinary claims (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811469)

well, it's sort of convinient that apple will not give the story anyhow.
at best we're going to have the emails. I'm fairly sure if she publishes them they include the words "the problem is the content". i'm fairly sure they will not be pgp signed though.

so if you want to test, write a short instruction booklet on amazon services and publish it?

Re:extraordinary claims (5, Insightful)

Reschekle (2661565) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811891)

You seem to be confused. YesIAmAScript claims that there are many books in the Apple book store that mention Amazon. If YesIAmAScript claims this then he must have knowledge and thus can tell us which books make mention of Amazon.

Re:extraordinary claims (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40812049)

You seem to be confused. YesIAmAScript claims that there are many books in the Apple book store that mention Amazon. If YesIAmAScript claims this then he must have knowledge and thus can tell us which books make mention of Amazon.

No because Newcastlejon says that only one side carries the burden of proof for any and all claims. His logic dictates that anyone after Holly can claim anything they want and not have to provide anything.

Of course, that's not logic at all, and so he fails hard on his face but still manages to score a +4 with the judges.

Re:extraordinary claims (0)

newcastlejon (1483695) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812123)

No, I say the burden of proof is hers because she's the one making the initial accusation. I didn't say any of the other crap you attribute to me.

Re:extraordinary claims (5, Informative)

rjames13 (1178191) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811565)

Require extraordinary proof.

There are plenty of iBooks already that mention Amazon.

We have one person making a blind accusation here.

Maybe you can give us some examples? ...

Selling on Amazon's FBA program by Nathan Holmquist
Make a killing on Kindle by Michael Alvear

If you ask me what is going on here, it is creative marketing. By blaming Apple for her book not being published, she gets free marketing for her book on Amazon. All this marketing fed by the frenzy of the Apple haters.

Re:extraordinary claims (2)

eddy (18759) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811715)

Problem though is that Apple is WELL KNOWN for not being consistent (that in fact is the most common complaint!), so there being other examples of books mentioning Amazon doesn't prove anything either way.

Re:extraordinary claims (4, Informative)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811761)

Mod parent up.

There are dozens and dozens of books that both "mention" Amazon, and have Amazon as their primary subject, many being books on how to publish on Amazon or otherwise make money on Amazon. Many authors publish on both Apple and Amazon.

Folks, use some common sense: Apple simply could not get away with this type of policy. And there is not reasonable reason why they would want to.

Without seeing the actual email traffic, we can't know for sure, but possibly it's a shitty book? Maybe there where technical issues that this woman didn't understand? Maybe there where copyright issues with parts of the content? Who knows?

I'm inclined to believe that this woman is either jumping to conclusions and doesn't feel like she should have to follow some process that Apple has requested, or like others have said, a stupid PR stunt.

Re:extraordinary claims (1, Insightful)

Aqualung812 (959532) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811467)

This isn't extraordinary. Apple has shown (along with Microsoft's phone market and other app-store approval systems) that when you have many humans editing for content, you get sometimes stupid rejections like this one.

Because someone at Apple rejected this app doesn't mean Apple itself rejects it as formal policy, but it might. I'm sure in the coming days we'll find out one way or another.

However, this highlights the issue with getting approval from a centrally controlled application market where approvals are granted by many different humans with different understanding of what the rules are. Nothing is black and white.

Re:extraordinary claims (1)

Qwavel (733416) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811603)

But she tried multiple times. According to the blog post she is now past the point of trying - she has given up.

Re:extraordinary claims (4, Insightful)

Qwavel (733416) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811575)

The article is by Cory Doctorow, who is very well known and respected.

I would assume he did some basic vetting of the claim - he is no fool and has a reputation to protect.

Re:extraordinary claims (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811691)

that's funny, are you here all week?

Re:extraordinary claims (5, Insightful)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811815)

The article is by Cory Doctorow, who is very well known and respected.

First, it's hardly an "article", it's a single paragraph followed by a direct excerpt of the blog post by the offended author.

Secondly, neither Doctorow nor the offended author provide any proof whatsoever. None.

Now, this is only speculation, but perhaps Apple had an issue with the cover art, which is a rip-off of the For Dummies series of books? Publishers that copyright issues seriously.

But, since the author has provided no evidence to support her screed, it's really a non-story.

Re:extraordinary claims (1)

Qwavel (733416) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811953)

She claims that Apple said they were rejecting her book because of the Amazon references.

If she is lying about that, then she could just as well have made up the whole thing.

I agree that some evidence (e.g. a copy of the communications from Apple) would be helpful, but is she allowed to do that?

Re:extraordinary claims (2)

hawk (1151) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812425)

How are you supposed to provide evidence of a transmission sent straight to your brain by the secret industry police that watch you . . .

? :)

hawk

Re:extraordinary claims (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811811)

I'm also curious why "How to Think Sideways" books 1,2, 4, and 5 weren't on the iBookstore - only book 3 is there.

Re:extraordinary claims (1)

hawk (1151) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812457)

You obviously don't know how to *count* sideays . . .

That's not a "3"' it's "111". (or is it "m"--this right-ending/left-endian thing has confused me since I was U . . .)

hawk

Re:extraordinary claims (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811971)

read her site, she's apparently a rabbid apple fan to start with - highly unlikely that she'd make ungrounded claims against apple when she worships the ground they build stores and offices on.

Which came first the chicken or the egg (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811305)

Which came first the Apple Fanboy with blinders to any wrong that Apple does, or Apple computers censorship?

Apple does stuff like say,"Flash is bad for the industry" and people start believing that propaganda even though Flash is really good for what it does: Cross platform, virus resistant(better than running an .exe on your desktop), and easy to code aps.

Is it time to say,"Whoa now Apple, you've just become as evil as mid 90s Microsoft?"

Re:Which came first the chicken or the egg (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811417)

flash is shit you fucking flash fanboi. no end user likes flash, only flash developers deludedly think flash is good. flash is shit and so are you.

Re:Which came first the chicken or the egg (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40812209)

LOL! You just proved his point! Come on, you're giving us older Apple guys a really bad name. Maybe you should come back in a few years when you can think for yourself; and more importantly, after your frontal lobe has developed.

There's nothing wrong with Flash. I'll always install it on my Macs and PCs given the choice.

Re:Which came first the chicken or the egg (0)

pjtp (533932) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811423)

Is it time to say,"Whoa now Apple, you've just become as evil as mid 90s Microsoft?"

They always were more evil than Microsoft, they just didn't have the market dominance.

Spend more time on debunking religion. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811307)

We should be spending more time on debunking religion

All this crap in the news these days is related to religion. Suicide bombers, Taliban, Israel - fuck 'em all. I could lead a perfectly happy life without any of it.

So why do they insist on injecting their problems into my life and detonating themselves with the maximum possible damage? Is this what your God commands you to do? I don't pretend to know; but I have a theory.

It's publicity. Without publicity, without advertising exposure, they don't have shit. They don't have a valid product to sell, so they sink all their resources into advertising.

Look, you can alway find suckers somewhere. Give a speech about how somebody turned water to wine? 1% of the people will believe you, and that's all you need to make a buck.

As I watch Romney prostitute himself (as he's alway done) today at the wailing wall and rail on cutting taxes for the wealthy, I think to myself: does this person represent me? Do I run in this circle? The answer, my friends, is no. I don't have yachts. I don't have car elevators. I invest my money, I do not buy and strip companies. The tax rate on the upper 1% is not a major factor to me, nor do I have close friends and supporters that I kowtow to that reside in this elite percentage.

Re:Spend more time on debunking religion. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811419)

I think they have a subreddit for politics as well as religion. This is /. I wish people would stop trying to turn it into reddit.

Odd (3, Insightful)

mmcxii (1707574) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811329)

If I start iTunes I find books about selling on Amazon.

I'm not saying the story isn't honest I'm just saying that there are plenty of Amazon resources available on iTunes that seems to offset what is being presented here.

Re:Odd (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811739)

Well, one difference is that you can find books about selling stuff via Amazon (eg, Amazon partners). So if you sell widgets and want people to buy your widgets via the Internet, one way of doing this is to become an Amazon partner and they'll do all the hard web stuff for you. I see plenty of books about that.

What I don't see are books about self-publishing on Amazon--unless they also mention iBooks (like this one. [apple.com] )

Good idea to avoid Amazon (0)

sugarmotor (621907) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811335)

Amazon is getting too big. Use it and suffer in the long run.

So avoid it and enjoy the benefits. Just like this author most likely would have made her lessons more valuable.

Maybe she take her own advice? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811369)

So I’m pulling ALL my work from the iBookstore today. I apologize to iBookstore fans. I tried. Hard.

Wow. Apple is hardly the first company to pull the Branding Police business. How hard would it be for the author to create an "iBooks edition" that differed in apparently trivial (but necessary, from Apple's POV) ways from the "Amazon edition"?

Maybe if the author learned to free her mind from strict, left-brained thinking...

Re:Maybe she take her own advice? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811805)

Because every self-respecting reader would avoid any author doing such a thing like the plague?

This is going to get worse.. (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811383)

Digital content is BAD.

Steam very bad on pricing, anti competitive, book stores, bad, tracking your reading and so on and can pull any book any time they want (been done on Amazon), music, same thing.

Second hand market, will die, libraries will die. I can go on and on about the negative effects digital stores and content will have on society.

NEVER GIVE UP PHYSICAL BOOKS/CONTENT.

If you do, you lost the fight.

I prefer to think of digital content a "CONVENIENCE" format for my PHYSICAL item I already have. NOT A REPLACEMENT for it.

Re:This is going to get worse.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811615)

Digital content is fine, just avoid anything with DRM. That doesn't leave much, but there are things to find, like the Humble Bundles, Doctorow's books, or the Louis CK show (to name something in gaming, music, books and video)

Re:This is going to get worse.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811703)

You're an idiot. Just shut the fuck up.

Re:This is going to get worse.. (1)

Kiraxa (1840002) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812367)

Obvious troll is obvious. Saying steam is very bad on pricing is one of the dumbest things I've heard in my entire life.

Doesn't seem right (5, Interesting)

SilenceBE (1439827) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811385)

I have bought some eBooks (usability bundle) by Smashing Magazine [smashingmagazine.com] that also are available on the Apple iBookstore and Amazon (and other competitors) have been mentioned multiple times in those books.

I'm beginning to question that there is much more to this story and it has been spin doctored to create some free extra publicity by riding on the iHate wave.

Re:Doesn't seem right (5, Insightful)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811479)

Well, it wouldn't be the first time when a large online store applies different rules to different submissions.

Happens all the time.

BS (4, Insightful)

edelbrp (62429) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811421)

I call BS. I did a quick search here for "Amazon" on the iTunes Store and it comes up with a number of books related to publishing and marketing with Amazon including publishing eBooks for the Kindle.

Re:BS (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811617)

You know, there may be more than one person reviewing the submissions. And they may not all make the same decision. Mistakes happen as well.

Re:BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811817)

Then Apple should fix it. Have 3 people vet every book independently. And do a majority rule. Track the cases of disagreement and the result could be a metric for "tuning"(firing) the workforce.

You think this is bad? Wait until... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811445)

They trap each and every one of you into INDIVIDUAL PRICING and INDIVIDUAL SEARCH RESULTS etc etc

What you see is not going to be everybody else's view of the store.

INDIVIDUAL views/pricing etc is going to be the most enslaving model that is coming to EVERY ONE OF YOU soon.

All publicity is good publicity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811531)

Need we say more.

Amazon has their own annoyances (4, Informative)

HangingChad (677530) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811593)

Amazon tells you that if you want to be in their lending library the content has to be exclusive to them for 90 days.

At the end of 90 days you discover that the 90 day clock resets. Instead of just saying as long as you want to be in the lending library, the content has to be exclusive, they play the recurring 90 day game.

I'm guessing if they just came right out and told the truth it might be challenged as anti-competitive.

I'm also guessing some big titles get a better deal.

Good grief, non-story (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811625)

There is simply no proof that this woman's claims are true. In fact there is a lot of evidence that her book was rejected for some other reason.

Since we do not get to see the actual email traffic from Apple, we have only the author's "paraphrased" quotes. How accurate are they? We can only speculate.

This is really a non-story about an author who is angry about a rejection notice. An author who gets bent out of shape whenever they get a rejection notice, will be a VERY angry author indeed.

Nonsense article (2)

hedpe2003 (1735078) | about a year and a half ago | (#40811687)

The sum total of the link:

"But I also will not deal with this sort of head-up-ass behavior from a distributor. You don’t tell someone “The problem is the live links,” and then, when that person has complied with your change request and removed the live links, turn around and say, “No, no. The problem is the CONTENT. You can’t mention Amazon in your lesson." - Holly Lisle

Sounds like a misunderstanding, in which the author is trying to profit from by complaining. There are a number of approved iBooks where Amazon in the main focus, rather than just a few mentions.

Now don't get me wrong - I'm not really an Apple fan... . I believe they have anti competitive practices. But oppression? This is not...

-Brian

Re:Nonsense article (3, Insightful)

gnasher719 (869701) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812223)

Sounds like a misunderstanding, in which the author is trying to profit from by complaining. There are a number of approved iBooks where Amazon in the main focus, rather than just a few mentions.

There is a paragraph in the AppStore guidelines that basically says "if your app is rejected and you complain, then we may reconsider. If you moan in public, that is not going to help." I would interpret it as "if you complain about the app store in public, then the app store will sadly learn how to live without you".

You can have my physical media after... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811737)

you pry it from my dead cold hands.

search-and-replace dummy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40811749)

g/Amazon/s//Online Bookstore/g

Or if she's going to sell it in various online stores, she (if she had any business accumen) would taylor the books to each store. I mean, how long does it take to do a search and replace and replace $ONLINESTORE with the appropriate name?

Re:search-and-replace dummy (1)

syockit (1480393) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812061)

would taylor the books to each store

Finding the derivative for a whole book is a nightmare. And you want to make a series out of it?!

Monopoly of control (2, Insightful)

WaffleMonster (969671) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812113)

We already know Apple pulls apps that compete with their bottom line so why should anyone expect different behavior from ebooks?

The problem in my mind is not really Apple or what apple does or does not do...It is the aggregation of power into the hands of the few with all the financial incentive in the world to leverage to the fullest.

Expecting them not to (ab)use it seems foolishly naive.

I vote with my purchases and encourage others to do the same.

Possible Workaround (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40812199)

Do they allow inline images that are about the same size as the text?
How about just making "amazon" into inline GIFs?

Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40812243)

I can't seem to say "fuck Apple" enough times.

Apple is stating to look like a one trick pony. (1)

asm2750 (1124425) | about a year and a half ago | (#40812269)

I probably will never buy another Apple product again. The closed garden is annoying. I have an iPod touch I haven't used in two years thanks to Google Music. OS X since Lion feels like iPhone OS which is annoying as heck, and now if I want a Retina MBP I can't upgrade the device which is a deal killer.

As much as a I like the experience, stability, and exterior design, I would rather put my funds to better use.

Besides with the Steve now gone after almost a year do they have any real long term vision, or are they just going to fade into obscurity again in the next five years due to their constant control mongering?

Waaahhhhh ... cry me a river (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40812289)

I wasn't aware anyone had a "right" to sell something in the Apple Store or anywhere else. However I'm sure she got exactly what she wanted; a lot of free publicity for her otherwise unremarkable writing. Makes all of us her tool FTW!

Aggressive TM defence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#40812291)

Sounds legit to me. I tried to sell my Amazon Kindle Fire in the UK and they shut down the eBay auction because they didn't want it to be sold outside the US. This was a second user sale of a used Kindle.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...