From the, "AP sells headline and lead-only services to customers. Asking the company to concede there’s a way people can share this information for free is like asking the RIAA to pick its favorite file-sharing client." it appears that they will not even allow exact titles to be quoted. If Cadenhead's take is right there HAS to be a Fair Use battle.
As far as the "lead only" service he is talking about. I don't think that is anything at FR. Every AP story linked I have seen goes to a full article.
You've never seen an excerpted article?!?
If they were still an organization that works on some kind of realistic principle, like so many still believe that the NYtimes operates on a business principle, then your theory would make sense. But actually their ultimate goal is the death of capitalism, even if it means their own death. It's like they are the suicide bombers of the news industry. Fanatics make no real sense to the rest of us.
This doesn't even fall under Fair Use of Copyright Law, it doesn't pass the Copyright test - you can't copyright book or movie titles, or headlines:
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-protect.html
Their business case doesn't make sense, but if they want to commit electronic suicide or do anything else "digital" (in anal-og sense) to themselves, who are we to stop them?
What's even worse for them that they have no legal case here, they are violating the same Copyright laws they supposedly try to "enforce"!
It's pure harassment by big bully which will be over because NOBODY will stand for this outrage - not righties with boycotts which will hurt AP affiliates, not lefties which have resources and will gladly dispose of AP after being taken to court, nor their affiliates who they supposedly are trying to "protect" after they lose traffic and ad revenue. So the only question is how soon it will be over and how bad it will turn out for AP in the end?