It doesn't? The archive he links to includes a copy of the whitepaper, but this repo is one archivist's collection of files, not an official distribution. The whitepaper is not in the nov08 distribution or the bitcoin-0.1.0.tgz, and the document doesn't include a license statement. I'd believe it's MIT licensed, but this post doesn't establish that fact or sound like he presented more compelling support of the idea to Amazon.
As a practical matter, it's vanishingly unlikely that Satoshi Nakamoto is going to file suit. But as a legal matter, he hasn't shown that the whitepaper was released under a license permitting redistribution or that he has permission from the author. Amazon gave him several options and opportunities, then declined to participate in apparent copyright infringement.
Amazon has a huge problem with people republishing others' books via KDP and their marketplace, even getting fake versions added to or replacing authentic listings. This process seems like it might be a pretty good way of addressing that. The inconvenience comes from not wanting to give the well-practiced scammers a guide to defeating the process, which is a common tradeoff.
> The whitepaper is not in the nov08 distribution or the bitcoin-0.1.0.tgz,
How do you know this? The original link in Satoshi's email points to a file that no longer exists and afaik he didn't publish a checksum. So maybe it WAS in there. But is that what the Amazon robot was worried about? Probably not...
Also, unless you were on the mailinglist yourself at the time, you can't even know that the email archive is real.
(And: if you think this archive may be inauthentic, perhaps you should've chosen another for your evidence.)
I'm just not seeing anything remotely like censorship here.
Book printers should be an easier choke point than social media companies, given that they have far less content to screen. It's just that no western government or advocacy group has bother to do the choking, as they are too busy pressuring social media companies to moderate content.
There's a different standard of due diligence if you publish a book vs just selling copies of it.
Did you read the article? It's absolutely different. An editor would tell you about the work whose copyright you supposedly violated.
Author baselessly predicts all other publishers will die out and Amazon will be the only option. Ironically, their article supports the opposite: presumably other publishers will continue to be successful specifically because of issues like this with Amazon KDP.
Not exactly the hard hitting content I expected from the title.
What I'm saying is that the way the book got blocked, is a harbinger of what future physical book censorship could look like. Once the techniques developed for social media moderation make their way into physical book publishing. Amazon happens to be ahead of the curve there, whereas other printer companies are probably still a bit old fashioned (which is good news).
https://i0.wp.com/sprovoost.nl/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/de...
