Do you remember back in the good old days, when people would talk about the publisher of a word processor claiming rights over the books written in it as a joke? As a humorous reductio-ad-absurdum to illustrate how out there something else was? Because
obviously no-one would
ever try to do that.
Rant about Apple iBook Author, whose license terms tell you to sell books produced only via iBookstore:
http://venomousporridge.com/post/16126436616/ibooks-author-eula-audacityTo be fair to the other side, a rebuttal in the telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/9028628/iBooks-Author-Apple-doesnt-want-to-own-your-book.html which (a) says its ok because you weren't using those rights anyway and (b) asserts very strongly that Apple don't claim to own your book, although don't provide any justification of that. (I mean, they can't sell it without your permission, but you can't sell it without their permission either: I can't see the difference.) I mean, I can see why it makes sense: this is designed to make books which only work in the apple walled garden, and it's obviously good for apple if they make a monopoly over ebooks, so I'm not surprised, but also it still doesn't seem like a nice idea.