In the digital world, I don't see why the agency model isn't ideal for the content providers. Even if they're the one's setting the prices, it still boils down to them finding a price point that will entice consumers to purchase their products. That Apple maneuvered to put this system in place only seems like a natural evolution to me if the publishers are to survive. The publishers were/are getting screwed by Amazon's model because ultimately, Amazon is just going to put the publishers and everyone else that sells books out of business, and I have zero doubts about that being their goal. Whether you think Amazon's dominance or the end of publishers are good or bad ideas is an ever more complicated issue, and there are plenty of legitimate arguments for both sides.
I can see the argument that's being made against Apple as being perhaps technically legitimate under our current system, but again, it only illustrates to me the many problems with our current system. We'll pitch a fit about something like this, calling it anti-competitive, but not consider at all that Amazon's model ultimately would kill off most of what we know as the book industry and leave them with what amounts to a monopoly. But worse, it's highly likely that Amazon's model would ultimately fail as well, but beforehand, it would have (and certainly already has) done a lot of damage to the overall business of selling books.
Publishers aren't perfect, bookstores aren't perfect, Apple's not perfect, and Amazon's not perfect. But what if ultimately the agency model is still just the best idea? Doesn't that count for anything? More than ever in the digital world, authors don't have to go to publishers; they can go straight to Apple or Amazon and sell their books and set their price and Amazon and Apple take their cut. If you want the benefits of a publisher, then you go that route and hopefully get your advance (How many of you have read about the games Amazon is playing here too? If you don't think Amazon is out to kill the publishers and become the publisher, you're not informed.) and your marketing, editing, distribution, etc. taken care of.
But either way, allowing the content providers to set their own prices for the various marketplaces ultimately seems like the best solution to avoid one company coming in and killing off the industry so they can take over, which is ultimately what Amazon is trying to do. I have no problems with them signing authors and trying to become a publisher, but I don't want to live in a world where every industry succumbs to the Wal-Mart effect.
Again, I just have to ask, doesn't it matter at all that the agency model just might be the best idea for all parties involved, even consumers when one truly considers the long-term effects of a marketplace dominated by one player, that ultimately would become the world's publisher as well?
