It's a silly thing to get worked up over. People who want to steal content can simply copy-and-paste the info from Amazon to the P2P search; this extension is merely saving them a step.
I think this kind of thing is actually really important.
People don't want to admit the rampant rate of piracy.
This often comes up with respect to Tipjoy in our plans to expand to payments for digital content. While we're going to be flexible in mandating payment for those merchants that want it, I'm really interested in the voluntary payment side.
Potential partners often ask about our payment rates, and I usually then ask about their payment rates. What percentage of people consuming the content actually bought it? I doubt they actually know. Considering only a few percent of music on ipods is purchased in the iTunes store, I wouldn't be surprised if voluntary payment increased their effective payment rates.
On the part of the extension author, sure -- not on the part of Amazon. You can't control how a user chooses to view the information they download from your website.
Edit: On reflection, my comment was not as clear as it should have been. I meant it's a silly thing for Amazon and the media to get worked up over, as the article implies this is somehow a problem with Amazon that needs to be fixed.
What the extension authors are doing isn't right, but there isn't much that can (or should) be done about it. The net effect of the extension on piracy is minuscule, and the potential for collateral damage to all the legitimate extensions (and internet use in general) is enormous. Presumably the extension authors are as untouchable as the Pirate Bay owners themselves, so preventing the extension's effects means attacking its use. And the path to attacking the extension's use leads to laws on what browsers you can use and how they must render the page.
(1) The comment is not very specific as to who is doing the aiding-and-abetting. (2) The article's title describes a problem with Amazon, and the content implies that they should be doing something about it.
You say "It's a silly thing to get worked up over." The "it" is later specified as "the extension". You also say it's "merely", reinforcing that you're saying that the extension is not worth getting worked up over. My point WRT aiding and abetting, then, is in response to your comment, which is about how the extension is not worth getting worked up over, by highlighting that the extension aides people in breaking the law.
Here it is: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/8432
A very minor tweak allows me to use it for Boston.