Monopolistic services such as Facebook, Amazon, Google have to strike a fine balance between fighting abusive usage of their services (of which there is a lot), and providing the opportunity to access them to all. Recently a few papers about Amazon switching off the account of some authors publishing on the platform have raise the issue in this particular remit: ‘Amazon self-published authors: Our books were banned for no reason‘ – and I am particularly sensitive to that particular area, being active in publishing.
The capability offered by Amazon to self-publish is an amazing opportunity for would-be authors. It is possible to publish without going through the selection criteria of publishers, do it electronically only and not have to bother about hardcopies. Some self-publishing authors have become professional, deriving significant income from their books. It has created vocations and allowed many people to write and publish that would not have otherwise.
As with any system there are ways to abuse it – part of the compensation provided by Amazon is based on the number of pages read by readers of the e-book. There are ways to inflate this number. And Amazon will ban abusers… and maybe some that do not intend, or do not abuse the system, but have a usage pattern that is too close.
The issue here is not that Amazon or the likes cancels the account of abusing users – they should do it – but that if you have not abused the system there are no clear ways to appeal. It is very difficult to reach the client support service. It is the same for other services as Facebook, etc.
This situation is quite similar to being condemned without having had a fair hearing. Dominating internet services should be mandated to set up appeal processes where users can raise their issue, if needed publicly, so that they can receive due consideration. The availability appeal process should be mandatory and this right protected by law.
