Comments on: B&N: DOJ e-book suit endangers consumers, bookstores and copyrighted expression

By: TM

TM — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 19:53:59 +0000

“The proposed settlement would “harm Barnes & Noble and other brick-and-mortar e-book distributors by leaving them where they were two years ago: a dominant player will set uncompetitive prices that all other potential competitors must meet to compete,”

Do they mean the same methods they used to drive local bookstores out of business a decade ago?

By: Laura Hazard Owen

Laura Hazard Owen — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:24:13 +0000

Greg, I’m really glad you found it useful…Thanks for the note.

By: Greg Freed

Greg Freed — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:24:12 +0000

and by “paincontent.org” i mean paidcontent.org, obviuosly. ;-p

By: Greg Freed

Greg Freed — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:23:06 +0000

Probably true, but at least the objection does show some ingenuity that’s not behind the curve, unique in B&N’s overall digital strategy.

By: Greg Freed

Greg Freed — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 18:20:46 +0000

Thank you for including the link to the letter. You were the only source that included it, which is only one of the many reasons I love and trust paincontent.org for my industry news.

By: Nikki Owen

Nikki Owen — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 14:24:10 +0000

Interesting article. the best route is to keep things fair, helping sellers and readers. Is the new regulation fair? It certainly shifts the goal posts, but not always in the right way.

By: Divergent Trend

Divergent Trend — Thu, 07 Jun 2012 13:42:37 +0000

A desperate move by B&N to delay being run out of business by Amazon.

Too little too late.