This is a place where the Davids of the world can unite and develop strategies and group efforts/consortia to make this world a better place to take on the Goliaths who bully anyone they choose. Whether it is parents striving to get a decent education for their children, writers struggling to find a forum for their work, or citizens working to get their vote counted, this site belongs to you...

New Bullies Perpetuating History

More than forty years ago, racist bullies thought they would silence the voice of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Since that time, there have certainly been gains in the civil rights movement, but there has also been stagnation.

King stated:
Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom. A man can't ride you unless your back is bent.

Read about the bulling that is continuing to occur in the fields of education, law, voting, and elsewhere and then straighten your back to walk tall, speak out, and work for doing what's right.

Monday, April 14, 2008

Response from DOJ regarding antitrust complaint against Amazon

I received this email response today from the department of justice regarding my complaint that Amazon is violating antitrust laws in their move to force POD publishers to use Amazon's inferior Booksurge printer.

Dear. Dr. Beckman

Thank you for contacting the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. The Citizen Complaint Center has reviewed your complaint, and we have forwarded it to the appropriate legal staff for further review. We have your information on file and should the legal staff need further information, they may contact you in the future.

We appreciate your interest in the enforcement of federal antitrust laws.

Sincerely,

Citizen Complaint Center
Antitrust Division
Department of Justice

-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Jeanne Beckman [mailto:bullies@jeannebeckman.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 12, 2008 5:31 PM
To: ATR-OPS Citizen Complaint Center
Subject: Amazon.com

To whom it may concern:
Please investigate Amazon for antitrust and restraint of trade over its print on demand (POD) requirements that authors and publishers will not be able to list and sell their books on the Amazon website unless they use Amazon's Booksurge.

I have great concern about actions currently being taken by Amazon.com. Amazon has traditionally made its platform open to independent authors using publish-on-demand (POD) services provided by numerous companies. Now, Amazon is moving to exclude any author who does not use Amazon's own POD service, Booksurge. Many, many authors have had problems with Booksurge, including not getting paid. In addition, authors who do make the transition will be forced to charge more in order to cover the costs of using Amazon's printing services in addition to the fees Amazon charges for selling products on its web site. To force all independent authors to use a single, inferior service, a service owned by the same company providing the marketplace, that will also result in higher prices for consumers, seems to be a good fit for the following, as described in the Sherman Antritrust Act:

An unlawful monopoly exists when only one firm controls the market for a product or service, and it has obtained that market power, not because its product or service is superior to others, but by suppressing competition with anticompetitive conduct.

Amazon controls such a large portion of the print-on-demand book market that by forcing authors to use its print-on-demand service, it is reducing the number of POD options to one. The harm to consumers comes in the form of products of poorer quality (as evidenced by the large number of complaints about the Booksurge service) and higher prices. I respectfully ask that you take a serious look at this new practice by Amazon.com and make a fair judgement about whether or not the company is in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Sincerely,
Dr. Jeanne Beckman

Have you contacted the attorney general in Washington or the U.S. department of justice (DOJ) yet?

jb

No comments: