I think the answer is simple, and it’s the same reason people pay for bottled water when they can get water for free. They like the packaging.

In this case, “irrevocable” I think essentially means that while the agreement is in force you can’t pull back content that’s already been distributed. I’m pretty sure there’s civil statues that make it unlawful to write a contract that is truly and permanently irrevocable. If memory serves the statute was born out of the Hollywood studio system where stars were indentured to specific corporations. There’s something like a seven year limit on contracts for television talent for the same reason.

On the money front, what’s an author get in royalties per book? 10%? 15%? Most of what you’re paying for in a traditional publisher is distribution, which is what Amazon is pledging to do here.

Still, why is someone going to pay for something they get for free already?

1. If the license is irrevocable, meaning that it cannot be revoked or undone and that it is without end, then that means that any value of length does not apply. Meaning that “the term of this Agreement” clause does not apply. And besides “term” in that section is too vague anyway. Because it doesn’t specify the “Term” (capital T) as established in Section 1. Therefore, it’s a useless clause. But even if we accept the “term” as “Term,” the “Term” is defined too poorly. All we get is “i.e., the Publication is no longer available on your website or otherwise available online or through any digital distribution service.” Not specific enough. And since Section 8 specifies that Amazon has the right to change the terms of the Agreement at any time, it’s useless anyway.

2. While there is certainly no specific clause to create a derivative book, I think you’re overlooking Section 8′s ridiculously liberal modification terms. Sure, you can opt out of the agreement by providing written notice. But you have to do so within seven days of Amazon sending any email to you updating you of the changes. And if you don’t give notice of your termination within seven days, you automatically accept the changes. And keep this in mind: “All rights to Publications acquired by Customers prior to termination shall survive termination, and Amazon shall be entitled to retain archival copies of the Publications after termination in order to provide access or copies of the Digital Books to customers who have purchased Publications prior to termination.” Guess what? Amazon keeps the rights to your previous content (as do the affiliates and the independent contractors). Meaning that they could effectively turn your content into a book. (Christ, the more I look through this agreement, the more jittery I get.) To be clear, it’s the “affiliates and independent contractors” line that bothers me the most, as does the extremely broad definition of “Amazon services,” which includes “any web site or online point of presence through which any Amazon sites or products available for sale thereon are syndicated, offered, merchandised, advertised or described.” (And, yes, that syndication would include books that Amazon could offer for purchase in the future. Think of what tomorrow’s “online point of presence” could be. You have to look at every agreement considering future technologies.)

3. A fair enough comparison with AdSense. But my problem here is that any action is “limited to a determination of the amount of monies.” Any grievance or action concerning Royalties may involve something more — like faulty technology or indeed future “Amazon Services” that are rolled out. (I mean, we’ve had Kindle 2 and Kindle DX just in the past few months. Amazon very much enjoys issuing new Services.)

4. Also, a fair point about print (and I’ll strike out the chapter excerpt point in my post after I finish this comment to reflect it). But this still means content you provide first on an online site will be given to Amazon. You may also want to check out Section 1.2, which is very specific about giving Amazon the right to compare print and online editions. I’d feel more comfortable about this Agreement if Amazon weren’t asking for so many rights. They may want to cover its rear, but they’re doing so without providing for a rider the way that other agreements of this type do.

If you read the paragraph you’ve cited completely you’ll find several of the clauses you call out are limiting:

1. “a nonexclusive, irrevocable, worldwide right and license to distribute” – the phrase that matters in this one big time is the one that comes right before it “throughout the term of this Agreement.” This whole section doesn’t survive the agreements termination (which you can do on 30 days written notice – after that point they still are able to retain copies of your content but only for the re-downloading of previously purchased copies).

2. There is no right to create a derivative work (such as a book) granted except in the case of the “metadata that you submit to us for the purpose of improving categorization, recommendations, personalization features and other features of any Amazon Properties” Another important point to this comes in section 10:
“Subject to the authorizations granted to us under this Agreement, as between us and you, you retain all ownership rights in and to the copyrights and all other rights and interest in and to the Publications.”
Also re-read section (b):
“(b) display, market, transmit, distribute, and otherwise digitally make available all or any portion of Publications through Amazon Properties (as defined below), for customers and prospective customers to download, access, copy and paste, print, annotate and/or view, including on any Portable Device (as defined below)”
That’s the primary right granted that involves sales — and its limited to the Amazon Properties. (which are also defined in the agreement). Amazon Properties are very strictly defined within section seven in the area you quoted.

3. The reference to section five is somewhat baffling to me because what its saying in the part of it that you reference is that if you challenge them on how much they owe you for publishing your work and you’re right that they should have paid you more then you get the money you’re owed without interest. This is a pretty standard thing from the internet services I’ve worked with before (heck, it’s better terms than Google AdSense will give you — you only get 30 days to dispute with them and it prevents you from taking action outside their system against them).

4. When it comes to guest posts and chapter excerpts and such, unless you have a print publication that you’re sending them you get to define what your content inclusion is. From Section 1.1: “This Agreement covers all content which you have identified for inclusion in the Program in the Application or which you otherwise provide to us for inclusion in the Program (each a “Publication”). If there is a print edition version of the Publication, then the Publication you provide must include the same content as the print edition version.” [note: back to me now] if you don’t want to include something then don’t include it within the definition of your publication.

The reason they need to grant these rights of transmission to independent contractors is because they need to cover their rear while using the cellular data networks that they’re jumping on to deliver publications to the Kindle wirelessly and because of the six other things a piece of kindle data goes through to get to an iPhone or Kindle. The various digital stores that can show it and the various locations where they can advertise / make links available to your product.

Perhaps I’m too trusting but that’s the way the agreement looks to me.
-Joe Kavanagh

Yes, but then they get to stand in their tiny vanity spotlight like a poor man’s Sally Field and gush, “You like me! You really like me!”

How pathetic!