Following on from
@Carol Haynes' comment above:
Because if the likes of Amazon and Apple get their way they will stop the production of real books in favour of eBooks even though the vast majority of people prefer to buy and read paper books.
- here is a twist to that, which I came across today:Librarian Attacks Amazon's Kindle Lending Program
"A California librarian is urging librarians to complain to Amazon over issues with privacy and advertising in Amazon's new Kindle ebook lending program for libraries. 'In our greedy attempt to get content into our users' hands, we have failed to uphold the highest principle of our profession, which is intellectual freedom,' she argues in a 10-minute video. (Read the transcript here). Amazon keeps your history of reading library ebooks on their corporate servers, 'so it's an instant violation of all of our privacy policies. And we haven't told people that, and we need to tell people that.' And while many libraries have strict policies against endorsing a particular product, the check-out process concludes on Amazon.com with a pitch urging library patrons to purchase more Amazon books — and there's even book-buying plugs in their 'due date' reminders."
What would you do if you operated a library offering a public library-lending service for people to access large collections of the material from the pool of documented human knowledge (delivered via a paper-based medium), and then a corporation comes along and offers you a sweet-looking contract to let you use their proprietary product technology which looks as though it might transform your whole delivery model for the better?
You'd probably jump at it. You'd sign the contract. Nirvana.
But what if you later realise that there's catch or two? Oops. Now it appears that you might have signed up prematurely for this service before you had fully appreciated some of the contractual implications and the downstream implications for your audience of customers.
What do you do? Complain?
Well, you could do, but a fat lot of good that is likely to do you when you have a licenced psychopathic legal person (QED per
The Corporation) on the other side of the table - a legal person with even more legal rights than either you or your state-run employer possesses.
You would probably just cave in (appeasement), as so many have done before when initially confronted by implacable, remorseless psychopaths. (e.g., Hitler).
Not a good idea when there are some serious implications regarding freedom/privacy involved.
I think this is a fascinating issue. Whether it is Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, Amazon or Government, Big Corporation/Big Brother
wants your ID - preferably your Social Security Number, but your real name and some precise demographic data will do. You - or more exactly your ID data - is a product, which can be milked/sold/targetted
ad nauseum to make a profit, by the psychopathic marketers who operate without scruple and with the sole objective of increasing profit and shareholder value - which they are legally obliged to do per their charter. Nothing else matters - including any pathetic desires for freedom/privacy.
I predict that this is only likely to serve to increase the bloc of corporate lobbyists that seek to further amend the Constitution and further erode the Bill of Rights wherever it blocks their ability to make further potential profits.
"All in all it seems to be, that you don't know what you've got till it's gone"
(Counting Crows - "Big Yellow Taxi")
Ain't democracy grand!?We establish our freedoms and then create a Frankenstinian monster (an ideology called Capitalism) that robotically creates licenced psychopaths, which we then spend our lives working for and fighting their efforts to destroy our freedoms. Hmm.
Communism would seem to be
much better...Oh, but wait...
