Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

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

Posted by samzenpus on from the not-in-our-store dept.

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.'"

53 of 332 comments (clear)

  1. The first rule of controlling a market... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    shut down discussion.

    1. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

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

    2. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    3. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 5, Informative

      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).

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    4. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by mk1004 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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?

      --
      I can mend the break of day, heal a broken heart, and provide temporary relief to nymphomaniacs.
    5. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by BasilBrush · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

    6. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by cpu6502 · · Score: 3, Informative

      >>>See, the problem here is you're setting up a straw man. Nobody is "forcing" Apple to sell anything.

      Yes. They are. I was directly responding to this request: "There needs to be a law against censoring content in a public marketplace by a public company." (It helps if you follow the thread-of-conversation before you reply.)

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    9. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by LordLimecat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Um, you want government legislating what a private company can and cannot sell?

      Stop and think about that, and why that is an awful idea.

    10. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      And this is relevant to Apple and Amazon how?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    11. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by jmac_the_man · · Score: 5, Funny

      Apple has religious fanatics?

    12. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by BluBrick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Try and stay on top of the discussion.

      I don't include ACs in the discussion generally. They are beneath my attention threshold.

      Then it is you and not the AC, who risks looking like an ass due to ignoring context previously established by someone that chose not to log in. But it's your reputation and your choice, and you are free to make it.

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    13. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by drkim · · Score: 5, Informative

      Can you tell me where in the Bible, Torah or Koran it says that sex is dirty?

      Like Song of Solomon:
      "We have a little sister, and she hath no breasts, But my breasts are like towers."
      "He shall lie all night betwixt my breasts."
      "Come ... blow upon my garden, that the spices thereof may flow out. Let my beloved come into his garden, and eat his pleasant fruits."
      "My beloved put in his hand by the hole of the door, and my bowels were moved for him."
      "He thrust his hand into the opening, and my inmost being yearned for him. I arose to open to my beloved, and my hands dripped with myrrh, my fingers with liquid myrrh, upon the handles of the bolt."

      You see..? Done Biblically, sex is very dirty!

    14. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by jrumney · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's a straw man argument. A religious bookstore is a specialist store, nobody expects them to sell books that are outside of that specialty. Apple on the other hand are presenting themselves as a general ebook seller.

    15. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by Smauler · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't include ACs in the discussion generally. They are beneath my attention threshold.

      Then you're missing out. AC posts are often very good. You sound a little arrogant when you say that ACs add nothing.

      Your previous post shows you can't even tell who you're replying to, and why they have posted what they did (which most ACs can). It's currently at +5 insightful, which shows some moderators are in the same boat. That post is just 100% wrong, through and through, as anyone who had read the parent of the post you were replying to could see immediately.

      Don't get all defensive, just admit you were wrong, and carry on.

    16. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      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.

      More likely in my jaded eye is that the story is bullshit. I read the article. Don't see anything that resembles any proof. Why wouldn't we see emails or other messages from Apple offered to show the Evil Corporations evilness? The credibility of the story is directly proportional to the readers hatred of Apple.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    17. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 5, Funny

      You see..? Done Biblically, sex is very dirty!

      Behold, I come like a thief in the night?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    18. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Okay, so if you ARE a plucky underdog being trampled on by a huge, faceless corporation, what the hell are you supposed to do? Just shut up and take it? I'm not saying you're wrong, but that thing you just said, big faceless corporations delight in people believing it because then they can do no wrong. If you're an asshole, that's your fault. If we're an asshole, then it's still your fault.

      So I'm genuinely curious, how do you, as a consumer, tell the difference? What do you know about this particular circumstance, this particular author, that we don't know that makes you think that she is being disingenuous?

      Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, maybe she is making a fuss just to get publicity. If so, then by all means, let us know why you think so so that we won't waste our time supporting her. It just seems to me that you're saying that anyone who makes a fuss must just be in it for the publicity, and I strongly disagree.

    19. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

      yes: i don't want private companies selling plutonium to anyone and i want my government to use my tax dollars to stop them

      no: i don't want private companies restricted by rules that squash competition and i want government free of the sort of meddling by large corporations that sometimes creates this vile status quo

      in other words, the idea of government legislating what a private company can and cannot sell is a large complicated concept that has many answers depending on the context

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    20. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Rest assured reasonable, normal human beings will cry bloody murder, brainwashed Apple drones will call it a slander campaign

      FTFY

    21. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by drkim · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm sorry A.C., I didn't realize it was ACTUALLY written in English. I thought it was ACTUALLY written in Hebrew.

      But perhaps you would rather enjoy Ezekiel 23:20 (New International Version translation)

      There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

    22. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by Requiem18th · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow, talk about blaming the victim. Don't pretend this isn't Apple's fault, in fact I don't even think this was planned, otherwise she would have complained from the moment the links were blamed.

      In a way I think this is a great opportunity to illustrate why monopolies, even popular ones are bad. Talking about popular monopolies, are you a fan of Apple? Because that was some nice brand loyalty there.

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
    23. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by KGIII · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are you retarded? The discussion is the comment made, in which they stated that there ought to be a law, and you attempting to pretend you actually understand the tenets of critical thinking.

      Now, no... There is no strawman here. The person said there ought to be a law that prevents people from censoring content in their store. That is very much like forcing the guy to put steamy sex novels in his religious store and very much wrong.

      That people feel entitled to compel people to act in certain manners completely baffles me in this day and age. Where has freedom gone? Why are we, the governed, so eager to give up our rights or the rights of others. Every single law is a restriction (for better or worse) of someones freedoms. That folks don't understand the difference between freedom and liberty may have something to do with that but is a topic for another day.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    24. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by bennomatic · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, a quick search of the iTunes Music Store lets me find a bunch of Amazon's apps. Narrowing it to books, there aren't many, but right on the first page of the search results is this and this.

      Maybe there's more to the story than meets the eye.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
    25. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by whisper_jeff · · Score: 5, Informative

      Again, I'm not saying you're wrong, maybe she is making a fuss just to get publicity. If so, then by all means, let us know why you think so so that we won't waste our time supporting her.

      Her claim is the book was refused because it mentions Amazon. Go to the iTunes store. Do a search for Amazon. Ignore the results about the geographic region and notice how many other books clearly and obviously mention Amazon. Take particular note, for example, of the book titled "Amazon.com" which, one would assume, is about Amazon and makes mention of the company.

      After you do this basic level of investigation, one can only be left to assume that there's either some key part of this story missing and/or she is doing this to generate attention for her book as a marketing ploy (driving people to buy her book on Amazon, most likely).

      It just seems to me that you're saying that anyone who makes a fuss must just be in it for the publicity, and I strongly disagree.

      I agree (with you) - making a fuss does not mean one is just trying to generate publicity but, especially in today's day and age one must be sure to consider the possibility that, yes, it is being done for publicity. It's a marketing tactic that has proven to work, largely because most people aren't willing to do any degree of investigation into whether or not a claim is true. Thus, he (or she) who complains loudest gets eyeballs.

      I believe, in this case, the story is either missing a very important key piece of information or, more likely, the author is manipulating the online media into generating hype regarding her book to increase sales.

    26. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by heathen_01 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I thought we were here to bash apple. Whats this about a book?

    27. Re:The first rule of controlling a market... by shentino · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's already on the books and it's called antitrust regulation.

      A lot of the "there ought to be a law" type situations only come about because the powers that be don't give a shit about enforcing laws already on the books unless it suits them.

  2. extraordinary claims by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Require extraordinary proof.

    There are plenty of iBooks already that mention Amazon.

    We have one person making a blind accusation here.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:extraordinary claims by rjames13 · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

    2. Re:extraordinary claims by Qwavel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    3. Re:extraordinary claims by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 4, Informative

      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.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    4. Re:extraordinary claims by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    5. Re:extraordinary claims by Reschekle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    6. Re:extraordinary claims by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Folks, use some common sense

      Hahahahaha! On Slashdot!? That's a good one!

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    7. Re:extraordinary claims by whisper_jeff · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Cory did any basic vetting, then he failed.

      Here, try this:

      Step 1: Go to the iTunes store.
      Step 2: Search for "Amazon"
      Step 3: Ignore all titles obviously about the geographic location and take note of how many books obviously include mention of "Amazon" the company.

      Protip: One of the books available for sale via iTunes is called "Amazon.com". I could be mistaken, but I think it mentions and discusses Amazon, the company.

      Her claim is marketing BS.

  3. Odd by mmcxii · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  4. Doesn't seem right by SilenceBE · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have bought some eBooks (usability bundle) by Smashing Magazinethat 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.

    1. Re:Doesn't seem right by gl4ss · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

      Happens all the time.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  5. BS by edelbrp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  6. Amazon has their own annoyances by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  7. Zero proof == Zero credibility. by divisionbyzero · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is zero proof in her claim. Why was this posted?

  8. Re:Nonsense article by gnasher719 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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".

  9. The first rule of reading comprehension... by Archfeld · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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...

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    1. Re:The first rule of reading comprehension... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

      Your assertion is not the same thing as a dictionary. You are just as mistaken as the other poster if you think that a store choosing not to stock a product is censorship. You don't understand the word.

      How about backing that up with some actual dictionary references instead of asserting your opinion as a definition?
      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censorship
      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censorship
      http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censor
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship
      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/whodecides/definitions.html

      Some definitions mention "official", but not all mention government as a necessary component.

      Censorship is a word of many meanings. In its broadest sense it refers to suppression of information, ideas, or artistic expression by anyone, whether government officials, church authorities, private pressure groups, or speakers, writers, and artists themselves. It may take place at any point in time, whether before an utterance occurs, prior to its widespread circulation, or by punishment of communicators after dissemination of their messages, so as to deter others from like expression. In its narrower, more legalistic sense, censorship means only the prevention by official government action of the circulation of messages already produced. Thus writers who "censor" themselves before putting words on paper, for fear of failing to sell their work, are not engaging in censorship in this narrower sense, nor are those who boycott sponsors of disliked television shows.
      --Academic American Encyclopedia

      Reading. It's not just for the landed gentry any more.

  10. Debbie does her stretch... maybe? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

     
    Hmm... TFA was talking about being blocked by Apple because of a mention about Amazon and you jumped in with Disney being forced to carry "Debbie Does Dallas"?
     
    Isn't _ that _ quite a stretch?
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  11. I got similar treatment from Amazon by PseudonymousCoward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In my book "The Making of 'I Saw Them Ride Away'" I mentioned the great help that Amazon, and their subsidiary CreateSpace, had been in enabling the publication of my Great-Grandfather's memoir. When I submitted the manuscript for format checking, it was rejected because it mentioned "amazon.com". I had to eliminate a very complimentary sentence, at their own insistence.

    I'm sure the policy makes sense to someone.

    --
    If it isn't true, don't say it. If it isn't helpful, don't say it. If it's true and helpful, wait for the right time.
  12. It's not about content - emails from Apple by lesserwhirls · · Score: 3, Informative
    From the author (taken from comments on her site):

    "Here’s the first email I received from them. Boldface is mine.

    Dear Holly Lisle,
    One or more assets from your submission, How To Think Sideways: Career Survival School for Writers, need to be replaced:
    Ticket #: 1438977
    Ticket Type: Book Asset
    Apple ID: 541126811
    ISBN: 9781937533304
    Vendor ID: 9781937533304
    Full book asset:
    Competing Website(s)
    Notes:
    Jun, 29 2012, 12:13PM – Apple:
    Book file contains links from competitors: Amazon, in the chapter Q&A 6, under “Question 9
    Please log in to iTunes Connect to view this request and upload replacement assets:
    If you have any questions about this report, contact us at the iBookstore.
    Regards,
    The iTunes Store Team

    Here’s the FINAL email I received from them before I removed my courses.

    Dear Holly Lisle,
    One or more assets from your submission, How to Think Sideways: Career Survival School for Writers, need to be replaced:
    Ticket #: 1438977
    Ticket Type: Book Asset
    Apple ID: 541126811
    ISBN: 9781937533304
    Vendor ID: 9781937533304
    Please note that the changes in this ticket were not executed. The ticket has been returned to you for additional corrections. Please make all of the changes requested below.
    Full book asset:
    Competing Website(s)
    Rejected Reason(s):
    Competing Website(s)
    Notes:
    Jun, 29 2012, 12:13PM – Apple:
    Book file contains links from competitors: Amazon, in the chapter Q&A 6, under “Question 9
    Jul, 18 2012, 4:54AM – Apple:
    Epub internals validation passed
    Jul, 18 2012, 4:54AM – Apple:
    The following ticket task(s) have been updated by the feed: Full epub
    Jul, 18 2012, 1:21PM – Apple:
    Please Note: The original change request was not fulfilled. Your changes were not saved. Previous issue was not addressed. Please review your file before resubmitting it. Thank you.
    Jul, 19 2012, 8:35AM – Apple:
    Epub internals validation passed
    Jul, 24 2012, 11:56AM – Apple:
    Please Note: The original change request was not fulfilled. Your changes were not saved. Original Issues have not been resolved.
    Please log in to iTunes Connect to view this request and upload replacement assets:
    If you have any questions about this report, contact us at the iBookstore.
    Regards,
    The iTunes Store Team

    As noted, however, I HAD changed the lesson, HAD removed the links, HAD complied with their request. Since the links were gone, their only possible objection—NOT STATED—was content."

    Sounds like she is reading between the lines. As noted in other comments, there are several publications in the iBookstore that deal directly with amazon (including publishing through them).

  13. Re:Please do not print large Jobs by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Informative

    The face of Apple [thechive.com] has died,

    But they clearly still have a prick.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  14. Re:Debbie does her stretch... maybe? by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    GGP was asking for public companies to be forced to carry everything

    No they asked for "a law against censoring content in a public marketplace by a public company". You and Karlt1 interpreted that to mean every company must stock every item. You are therefore (unintentionally) using a strawman argument.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  15. Re:Debbie does her stretch... maybe? by Another,+completely · · Score: 3, Insightful

    GGP was asking for public companies to be forced to carry everything

    No they asked for "a law against censoring content in a public marketplace by a public company". You and Karlt1 interpreted that to mean every company must stock every item. You are therefore (unintentionally) using a strawman argument.

    Sorry, but I missed your point. How do you prevent "censoring content" while still allowing stores to select content that they feel is suitable for their customers and image? If every company is not required to stock every item, how do they select what they want to sell without being accused of censoring what they didn't select?

  16. How do you know that Apple is consistent? by jjo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So why, in particular, do you assume that Apple must be consistent in its content filtering? You assume that because Apple has permitted references to Amazon in other cases, they would necessarily have permitted it in this case. It could be that Apple has a policy of filtering out references to Amazon, but does not do so automatically. This book may have been manually reviewed because of the previously-included links to Amazon (another inane Apple policy). We don't know what all of Apple's policies are in this case, but assuming mendacity on the part of this author is completely unwarranted.

  17. Poor reasoning by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Her claim is the book was refused because it mentions Amazon.

    More precisely, her claim is that that is the reason Apple stated the second time they rejected it.

    Go to the iTunes store. Do a search for Amazon. Ignore the results about the geographic region and notice how many other books clearly and obviously mention Amazon. Take particular note, for example, of the book titled "Amazon.com" which, one would assume, is about Amazon and makes mention of the company.

    So? It wouldn't be the first time that the reasons Apple stated to the creator for rejecting one product from their online store were inconsistent with the fact that other products which would, rationally, be rejected by the same rule had already been accepted in the same store.

    After you do this basic level of investigation, one can only be left to assume that there's either some key part of this story missing and/or she is doing this to generate attention for her book as a marketing ploy (driving people to buy her book on Amazon, most likely).

    Well, no. In order to reach that conclusion based on the evidence you cited you have to first assume, additionally:
    1. That Apple's stated reasons for rejecting a product are always accurate and complete,
    2. That Apple's standards in accepting products in its online store are consistent.

    Unless you assume both of those are true, the fact that other products appear in the store that would not be expected to if the reasons they allegedly stated for rejecting the product in question had been applied across the aboard is not evidence against the allegation that they rejected the product and gave the reason stated.