As I have mentioned on FR before, the "hot news" legal doctrine applied perfectly to AHN because they write their stories under AHN, as original material. If any / much of that was lifted from AP stories without crediting AP as a source (a crucial, deciding factor in the doctrine) it is considered misappropriation and misattribution of original material.
This is not the case on FR and similar sites, where attribution (to AP and other sources) and link to original story is required and followed by participants, i.e. there is not only no attempt at passing off the story as original source, but rather the strong desire to attribute the story to its authors and distributors (AP et al).
Misappropriation and misattribution of the source of news story is at the heart of 1918 "hot news" case of International News Service vs Associated Press, as well as AP vs AHN. Nothing could be further from "hot news" doctrine than posting and attributing AP story and link on FR.
Sample of AHN news article byline:
Philips Brings Optimism To Consumer Electronics Sector With 2Q Net Profit; Tops Estimates Mayur Pahilajani - AHN News Writer
New York, NY (AHN) -
Thank you for posting that. I was getting down the thread and thinking, “oh man, I’ll have to post clarification for those who can’t read the story itself or understand the important elements of the doctrine.”
Thank you very much for that explanation. I wasn't clear whether this ruling would affect "fair use" which I believe is a very good principle to keep and, of course, that FR is based on.
Thanks again! Very helpful.