Posted on 06/20/2008 3:01:32 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
I don't blame the Associated Press for refusing to participate in a conversation about its attempts to overthrow government authority and rewrite copyright law its own liking. The AP is like a husband who foolishly told his wife that the new jeans do make her butt look big. The best way to limit damage at that point is to simply shut up and hope the subject eventually goes away.
But this issue isn't going away. The AP is doing nothing less than attempting to unilaterally rewrite copyright law, and also undermine citizens' freedom to criticize the news media. It's just plain wrong, it's un-American, and it needs to stop right now. The American people, through their elected and appointed representatives and judges, have a monopoly on writing laws. The AP doesn't get to make its own rules.
At the center of the controversy is Drudge Retort, a somewhat Digg-like social news site (not to be confused with the Drudge Report). AP issued a Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown notice to Drudge Retort last week. The AP went far beyond normal copyright claims, stating that the Drudge Retort's quoting headlines and short excerpts -- less than 100 words each -- was sufficient to violate the AP's copyright. Most people on the Internet would consider that behavior fair use -- indeed, it's standard practice for blogs for years -- but the AP says it was ripped off.
(Excerpt) Read more at informationweek.com ...
I like Michelle Malkin’s suggestion:
If your blog or your blog comments have ever been quoted in any material AP distributed, send them a bill.
That could be applied to FR as well, Jim. If we can’t quote them, then they can’t quote us.
We have to win this one to prevent the setting of a precedence.
That was suggested here on JR’s first post about the AP boycott!
True. It doesn't take too many sentences from an A.P. article to capture the essence of the article being propaganda and anti-American.
When they make the claim that they can charge when you use as few as 5 words from one of their articles basically gives themselves the license to search every 5 word phrase of ANY article they ever reported and if they can match it up ANYWHERE on ANY website, then you would owe them money.
It’s hogwash and they know it.
From the article:
“So what constitutes fair use? AP says, outrageously, that you have to pay to quote as few as five words.
That’s simply preposterous — and, moreover the AP knows it. It violates its own guidelines in its own articles. It quoted a passage of 154 words from the blog Patterico’s Pontifications, and 22 words from the blog TechCrunch. And the AP doesn’t even provide links back to TechCrunch — a violation of one of the very few fundamental rules that virtually all bloggers and Internet journalists agree on.
TechCrunch editor Michael Arrington is furious and he’s going to file a DMCA takedown notice against the AP. He writes: “Am I being ridiculous? Absolutely. But the point is to illustrate that the A.P. is taking an absurd and indefensible position, too. So I’ve called my lawyers (really) and have asked them to deliver a DMCA takedown demand to the A.P. And I will also be sending them a bill for $12.50 with that letter, which is exactly what the A.P. would have charged me if I published a 22 word quote from one of their articles.”
But that’s not the AP’s only sin. The terms of service say you can’t criticize the AP. Which means that the AP is trying to undercut literally centuries of political freedom in America and Europe, in which citizens claimed the freedom to report the news, and criticize each other’s reporting and opinions.
Democracy is not a marketplace of ideas, it’s a brawl, and the AP is trying to claim that it should be granted the privilege of being exempt from criticism.
Malarkey.”
Bills from FR would probably bankrupt The Colbert Report.
Indeed. When I see the word “The”, and it’s AP, I know exactly where they’re going. ;-)
AP dun shot themselves rat inna foot!
Good. Colbert is about as funny as a canker sore in my butt.
BTTT
An excellent side benefit!
An excellent side benefit!
If they get away with this, a resumption of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” is next: They may even apply it to the Internet.
Do you mean every time we use “It is President Bush’s fault!” we have to pay AP?
I believe so. And don't call Bush a Hitler. That's more money in the AP's pocket.
I have a sneaking suspicion if it ever goes to court the AP will prevail and here is my reasoning. The Press is the only people that can bring down lawyers and the legal system in America and what I mean by that is the press for post part overlooks what lawyers and judges do and the way they do it. They are not held accountable and I think the press will be catered to by the legal profession the same way. Scratch my back sort of thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.