Forgot your password?

typodupeerror
Media Businesses Google The Internet

Doctorow Says Google & Amazon Stifle Progress 162

Posted by Soulskill
from the among-others dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Google and Amazon are 'a danger to everyone involved in the creative industries' because they act as the intermediary between creators and audiences, says Boing Boing editor Cory Doctorow. He warns that the corporate giants will 'only fear competition from other established giants ... companies whose character as gatekeepers of video distribution and discovery won't be substantially different.' The solution, he says, is to use copyrights to lower the cost of entering the market. 'For so long as copyright holders think like short-timers, seeking a quick buck instead of a healthy competitive marketplace, they're doomed to work for their gatekeepers,' he says."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Doctorow Says Google & Amazon Stifle Progress

Comments Filter:
  • What (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Brian Gordon (987471) on Saturday June 20 2009, @10:34AM (#28401711)
    So artists should spend 60 hours a week pressing disks and mailing boxes to cut out the middleman? So there should be a hundred thousand separate online stores, one per manufacturer? I'm not giving out my credit card number to some rubik's cube manufacturer, but Amazon is trustworthy. And how does it make good sense to design a web site for every manufacturer; just uniting everything in one familiar format is much more efficient. Any possible gains from doing it on your own would be offset by the cost of developing and deploying your own ecommerce platform. I don't think Doctorow realizes how many millions of dollars it costs to run warehouses and hire workers.
  • Re:What (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Brian Gordon (987471) on Saturday June 20 2009, @11:01AM (#28401925)
    They could do only digital distribution but they're missing out on a lot of money. Probably more money than amazon would take off the top.

    Also good luck with digital distribution of electric shavers and vacuum cleaners.
  • by Bigjeff5 (1143585) on Saturday June 20 2009, @12:36PM (#28402529)

    What's REALLY funny, as another commenter pointed out earlier, is that every company he complains about started as some guy with an idea and a garage about 10-20 years ago! Talk about raising the barrier to entry!

    Google did not exist in the early 90's, some guys with a great idea for a search algorithm started a search engine in their garage (or maybe basement, I don't remember). People started saying "Hey, this is kinda cool", and it grew, and as it grew so did it's influence, and eventually the Mega-Corp Google (actually on the small end of mega-corp) was born.

    Amazon, same thing, some guy in his garage said "I can't afford to open a book shop, I know, I'll sell books on the internet!". It started small, and grew, and now Amazon sells -everything- and keeps market prices down while doing so because of his business model.

    Doctoro seems to be forming his opinion by closing his eyes to the last 15 years of the Internet. Well, 15 years is not a long time, and in that time we've seen entire markets shaken up by the continually lowering barrier to entry - just look at the newspapers going through the same thing now.

    Google and Amazon may be gatekeepers, but it's the back gate they are keeping, and they've been propping it open. If they try to close it now, an enterprising individual will simply find a new gate to prop open.

  • Inconsistency Alert (Score:3, Interesting)

    by brit74 (831798) on Saturday June 20 2009, @01:23PM (#28402839)
    Funny, back in 2006, Cory Doctorow wrote an article titled: "Why Publishing Should Send Fruit-Baskets to Google", where he says:

    Google's new Book Search promises to save writers' and publishers' asses by putting their books into the index of works that are visible to searchers who get all their information from the Internet.

    Oh, and congratulations on getting yourself on slashdot, again, "anonymous reader" (aka Cory Doctorow). You are truely a master of self-promotion. Clearly, Doctorow has a talent for creating controversial stories to raise his status and visibility on the internet. It isn't really about the consistency of his views, but rather, saying whatever is going to get himself in the news.
  • by hal9000(jr) (316943) on Saturday June 20 2009, @04:10PM (#28403965)
    Disclaimer: I don't necessarily agree with Doctrow's position, but I also have looked into it very deeply, either.

    His claim, however, is that Google settled with the Authors Guild to pay a one time fee to authors if their books are indexed. I know this because my wife, who is a novelist, filled out the form for her publisher. The settlement was going to be quite small. Anyway, Doctrow's position is that Google, being a big honking company with deep profits negotiated with the Authors Guild to Google benefit *because* it was cheaper and IMHO, not Doctrow's, better PR. The Authors Guild, on the other hand, was not funded enough for a prolonged legal battle, so too the settelment. The Guild gets some press.

    Now lets say you have an innovative idea to do something with book text. Maybe it falls into "Fair Use", maybe not. You haven't thought of that because your spending time developing your idea. So you build a service and start indexing books. Uh oh, the Authors Guild gets their dander up and gets their lawyers on your ass. Your start-up company is in a vastly different position than Google. You don't have deep pockets and you don't have market power to throw around, nor are probably going to be able to fund a prolonged legal battle which you may or may not win. In Doctrow's view, you won't be able to negotiate a favorable settlement and you will close up shop. Thus, you and your innovative idea are stifled.
  • by Nom du Keyboard (633989) on Saturday June 20 2009, @06:20PM (#28404839)
    I'm selling eBooks through Amazon and Fictionwise, and will move into POD books soon also through Amazon. There is no way to reach that audience other than by playing by their rules since I don't have a big mainstream publisher behind me. If I can sell for money through Google in the future I'll do it there as well. If Amazon and Google are making too much in the way of profits off of my work - compared to zero profits otherwise for me - then I will use what I do get from them to invest in their stock in order to share those profits.

    Wake me when a better proven selling model for a small author arrives.
  • by UnderCoverPenguin (1001627) on Sunday June 21 2009, @09:45PM (#28415421)

    True, they have. But that is no guarantee they will continue to help the little guys.

    Once upon a time, the record companies helped little guys. Now, they have gotten themselves into a position where can collect royalties on tracks from indy artists. True, the indies can claim the royalties due them, but are required to pay $50 (per year, as I recall) to do so. Yes, I know this is nominally to cover costs, but if my tracks do not "earn" enough in statutory royalties, then they get to keep some of my money (either the difference after paying the $50, or all the royalties if I don't pay the $50).

    Google's motto is "Don't be evil." It says nothing about being good. Even if they continue to live up to their motto, they can still fail to be good.

    Do not get me wrong. While I do, truly, appreciate the help from Amazon and Google, I am quite aware that even they could become part of the problem.

Space is to place as eternity is to time. -- Joseph Joubert

Working...