Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon and the dystopian future of book censorship

sprovoost.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–28 of 28 posts

Re: Amazon and the dystopian future of book censorship

#21

Post by sprovoost »

giaour wrote: post #17
sprovoost wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because Amazon doesn't scan paper books, this route still works. But there aren't that many companies that can print books. It's a matter of time before they all scan the content before printing. At least, in the dystopian scenario. Book printers should be an easier choke point than social media companies, given that they have far less content to screen. It's just that no western government or advocacy group has…

Why would they scan paper books to proactively look for copyright violations? Have you ever heard of a bookstore doing that? There's a different standard of due diligence if you publish a book vs just selling copies of it.

I did not say: "They will all scan physical books"

I said: "It's a matter of time before they all scan the content before printing."

Re: Amazon and the dystopian future of book censorship

#22

Post by sprovoost »

giaour wrote: post #18
pilgrimfff wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no different Did you read the article? It's absolutely different. An editor would tell you about the work whose copyright you supposedly violated.

Unlike KDP, an editor is not a hyper-discount service provider, so they can afford a more time consuming customer engagement process.

You're confused about the roles here. An editor is someone who works either directly for the author or they work for the publisher. In any case they don't work for the printer / distributor, which is KDP.

An editor or "professional" publisher may be able to explain the author what the problem is, but if they upload the book to KDP, they'll the exact same information I do. Unless there's some old boys network of course.

There may also be publishers that have an in house printing service. But then you lose the distribution advantage Amazon offers, because they can get a book from the printing press to the customer much faster (without inventory).

As I pointed out in the blog, it takes Amazon about 3-4 days from their printer in Poland to my home in Utrecht, and that includes 1 day in some sort of intermediary Amazon delivery warehouse in Rotterdam. IngramSpark needs two weeks to get book into the EU, but even in the US - when a customer orders from Amazon - they seem to need about a week. Old school publishers are probably even slower, if they can do print on demand at all.

Re: Amazon and the dystopian future of book censorship

#23

Post by giaour »

sprovoost wrote: post #22
giaour wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike KDP, an editor is not a hyper-discount service provider, so they can afford a more time consuming customer engagement process.

You're confused about the roles here. An editor is someone who works either directly for the author or they work for the publisher. In any case they don't work for the printer / distributor, which is KDP. An editor or "professional" publisher may be able to explain the author what the problem is, but if they upload the book to KDP, they'll the exact same information I do. Unless there's some old boys network of cours…

My only experience in the field is working for an "old school" publisher, where copyright concerns like the one described in the blog post would be the responsibility of the acquisitions editor (an employee of the publisher). Our printers were a separate company, who, like you say, had no editorial responsibilities. "Old school" publishers do typically coordinate distribution, though. There are also some that support print-on-demand (for example, Manning).

I think it's instructive here that KDP stands for Kindle Direct Publishing, not Kindle Direct Printing.

Re: Amazon and the dystopian future of book censorship

#24

Post by giaour »

sprovoost wrote: post #21
giaour wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would they scan paper books to proactively look for copyright violations? Have you ever heard of a bookstore doing that? There's a different standard of due diligence if you publish a book vs just selling copies of it.

I did not say: "They will all scan physical books" I said: "It's a matter of time before they all scan the content before printing."

I think the distinction between printer and publisher is being lost here. KDP is a publisher, and a very cost-conscious one at that. You would have a very different experience with the editorial process of a different publisher, as most don't use Amazon-level automation.

Re: Amazon and the dystopian future of book censorship

#25

Post by pushcx »

sprovoost wrote: post #13
pushcx wrote: post #3

> The whitepaper was included with the rest of the source code, which was released with the MIT license, see e.g. this archive. It doesn't? The archive he links to includes a copy of the whitepaper, but this repo is one archivist's collection of files, not an official distribution. The whitepaper is not in the nov08 distribution or the bitcoin-0.1.0.tgz, and the document doesn't include a license statement. I'd belie…

If Amazon wanted more detailed proof, they could just ask for that. There's no limit to how pedantic one can be in evaluating evidence. Maybe they need a physical wet signature from a specific bureaucrat at the US copyright office, sent by courier. Without knowing what constitutes evidence in their eyes, there's simply too many permutations of things they might want to see. I tried a few of those permutations and the…

It's not even that the evidence isn't good enough, or that the archive appears inauthentic, it's that the evidence you've supplied doesn't even attempt to support your claim. Nothing in the archive you linked implies the whitepaper is under MIT.

(And: if you think this archive may be inauthentic, perhaps you should've chosen another for your evidence.)

Re: Amazon and the dystopian future of book censorship

#26

Post by sprovoost »

pushcx wrote: post #25
sprovoost wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Amazon wanted more detailed proof, they could just ask for that. There's no limit to how pedantic one can be in evaluating evidence. Maybe they need a physical wet signature from a specific bureaucrat at the US copyright office, sent by courier. Without knowing what constitutes evidence in their eyes, there's simply too many permutations of things they might want to see. I tried a few of those permutations and the…

It's not even that the evidence isn't good enough, or that the archive appears inauthentic, it's that the evidence you've supplied doesn't even attempt to support your claim. Nothing in the archive you linked implies the whitepaper is under MIT. (And: if you think this archive may be inauthentic, perhaps you should've chosen another for your evidence.)

Ah, I see your point.

Here's a January 6, 2009 snapshot from the Way Back Machine. This was before he publicly released the code. The entire project is MIT licensed and only contained one file: the whitepaper. https://web.archive.org/web/20090106201347/http://sourceforg...

I should have linked to that.

> if you think this archive may be inauthentic

I don't think it's inauthentic. I'm saying Amazon could think it's inauthentic, and not tell me.

Re: Amazon and the dystopian future of book censorship

#27

Post by sprovoost »

giaour wrote: post #24
sprovoost wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not say: "They will all scan physical books" I said: "It's a matter of time before they all scan the content before printing."

I think the distinction between printer and publisher is being lost here. KDP is a publisher, and a very cost-conscious one at that. You would have a very different experience with the editorial process of a different publisher, as most don't use Amazon-level automation.

I wouldn't even call them a publisher. They're a printer, drop-shipper and a book store. I am both the writer and the publisher and I hired my own editor. A lot of companies call themselves "publisher" but really aren't.

Indeed the experience with other printers has been better. Same with e-books (so far). In fact at this point I'm quite happy I didn't use Amazon.

Re: Amazon and the dystopian future of book censorship

#28

Post by sprovoost »

giaour wrote: post #23
sprovoost wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're confused about the roles here. An editor is someone who works either directly for the author or they work for the publisher. In any case they don't work for the printer / distributor, which is KDP. An editor or "professional" publisher may be able to explain the author what the problem is, but if they upload the book to KDP, they'll the exact same information I do. Unless there's some old boys network of cours…

My only experience in the field is working for an "old school" publisher, where copyright concerns like the one described in the blog post would be the responsibility of the acquisitions editor (an employee of the publisher). Our printers were a separate company, who, like you say, had no editorial responsibilities. "Old school" publishers do typically coordinate distribution, though. There are also some that support…

I think their name is deceptive, see my other reply :-)
Post reply on HN