I would observe the hyperbole is usually coming from the consumer side, where it is histrionic. The consumer always has the option to simply not consume, one I use quite frequently when the DRM deal is not in my favor.

This is an author, realizing he's being enticed into the car trunk with pretty candy, and that he got taken awfully far in before he noticed. I think a bit of hyperbole is a bit more justified, so as to warn the others.

the problem isn't just the inconvenience for customers. the bigger threat for authors is that amazon isn't just a quasi-monopoly, but also a monopsony (meaning publishers have to publish through amazon; it's a monopoly for suppliers instead of customers).

as an author or publisher you can't get away from amazon anymore because you would invaliate your whole library. if you want to switch, your customers can't read your books anymore, because they're bound by the kindles DRM.

so for us the question is if we can or cannot read a book - for the author it's an entirely different question; it's about being dependent on amazon without alternatives. so of course he's got to be a lot more to lose.

ah, and why not use strong language - he's an author, he knows what he does :)

i don't completely get it though, because the kindle is able to handle unprotected mobi files, plain text and html. i had several of those (creative commons or public domain) on mine and it worked flawlessly. do the mobi devs charge a licensing fee or why are those formats not accepted as a free format? ok - plain text really isn't an alternative for most, but html or mobi?

Definitely over the top. Revoking licensing aside, the Amazon ecosystem is pretty open- apps for every almost every OS, no requirement for online access to read books, copy and paste (up to a limit), multiple licenses per customer.