Originally Posted by Asherian
Many people seem to not comprehend the issue. The issue is not the agency model (setting their "own price").
The issue is Apple's condition that no one else ever sell it for less than Apple. This eliminates competition by definition. All other stores must use the price from the iBookStore and never offer it for less. This is quite literally price fixing. Price fixing is most definitely illegal.
You're right about one thing, many people seem not to comprehend the issue, and you're one of the ones who doesn't. (Actually, you do, you're just pretending not to.)
The issue is that Amazon is leveraging its dominance in online retailing generally, and traditional book selling particularly, to completely control the e-book market, drive other e-book, and traditional, booksellers out of business, and establish complete control of the publishing industry. In other words, to create a market where Amazon is the only place you can buy or sell books, eventually allowing Amazon to dictate price at both ends.
Amazon's primary goal is to use e-book dumping as a means to drive other booksellers out of business. Their secondary goal is to establish hegemony over publishers that will allow them to control what they have to pay publishers for books, and even to control what books get published at all. (If Amazon doesn't want to sell it, once they are the only game in town, there won't be any reason for the publisher to "print" it.)
It's particularly hypocritical of posters like Asherian
, who have come here time after time disparaging Apple's "walled garden" on, among other pretexts, that Apple effectively engages in censorship, and lauding Google's (pretended) "openness" as the key to our salvation, to come here and argue that Apple is in the wrong for taking a course that promotes free and open markets in publishing and that Amazon is an innocent lamb when clearly their intent is to establish de facto control of an entire industry.
It's inconsistencies like this that show who's here for honest discussion and who's here with an agenda that doesn't depend on honesty.