The original date of release for D&D 3.5 was apparently the 4th-7th of July. Reports I heard indicate that on the 4th the WotC website, which is automated, started asking why you haven't got your 3.5 and how you should rush out and buy it. The reason for the change in the first place was because of a misunderstanding as to when GenCon was on. A simple mistake to make, but corrected... except for the website. Oops.
Amazon's website would also have information added as per initial release sheets and altering such information will take time, assuming it happens at all. This depends on if they receive the relevant information in time. As such, their website will simply spit out what is in it's database for set dates.
Now, as for the problem of breaking a books embargo date (i.e. street date), if a producer/publisher sets a release date and states that a release is NOT to be publicly available till then, you can bet that there are penalties associated with breaking that date (well, sometimes anyway).
For the latest Harry Potter book, the penalties included an (Australian) $10,000 fine and loss of access to future releases in the series until after the initial rush died down. Retailers who agreed to these requirements were provided stock up to three days prior to the street date. Anyone not prepared to agree, had to wait till their stock arrived on the day, or soon after. Part of the agreement included that the boxes that contained the book were not to be opened till the release date (and in fact the stated hour of release).
In the first five days of sale, one store sold over 3000 copies. When you consider that any other major author would have sold 500 copies over a month, now imagine someone successfully breaking the release date by a week and getting away with it.
When the Star Wars: The Phantom Menace novel was originally released, LucasFilms had representatives phoning around and asking stores if they had stock on hand. Several stores said yes, the staff not realizing that the item was not available for sale and was in their systems only because the stock had to be entered to be priced and made ready for the release date.
In my experience, only Warner Brothers and LucasFilm have been so strict as to actually follow up on their required embargo date with their licensee's. Many embargo dates tend to be ignored, as storing stock can be difficult, especially in smaller stores.
The reason why people are unhappy as to others breaking embargo is not because they want an equal footing, it is because they have tried to play by the rules and by doing so have been penalized. They are seeing someone else break the rules, making the profit and in effect destroying any reason for retailers who are following the rules to stick with the rules.
And to add insult to injury... the rogue retailer/distributor is getting away with it. If you break the rules and are part of the authorized chain of distribution, you will be punished (maybe).
In the end, people get upset because by playing by the rules as set, they wind up hurting themselves, but if they act against the rules, it could be worse and they can't do anything about it. Frustration sets in and the publisher/producer cops the flack and has to try to deal with such occurrences. Placing an order for stock, especially when it is on a firm
sale basis (as compared to the sale or return policy of the book trade) can be a complete disaster if you order 100 copies of a book, only to find out the 90 sales you knew you were going to make in the first week have now been cancelled because your customers have bought it else where... Suddenly you have 90 copies of a book that may take months to sell off, that's money tied up that could be better used elsewhere.
As for why distributors/Publishers enforce embargo dates? It's not about creating an even playing field at all (no matter what they say). It is about creating a field where fans are desperate for the product, were people rush out and buy, buy, buy... Before anyone has the time to turn around and read the book. Before anyone can say... god this sucks.
It is about maximizing sales at all levels, not only by selling large quantities to the existing market, but also by creating interest in areas that see the hive of activity and drop on by to see what is going on... and maybe buying the product. It is good for the retailer, it is good for the distributor and it is good for the publisher.
If the book does suck, then future product may suffer as far as sales go, but if the publisher has done their job, then this shouldn't occur and the market will be a little healthier.
