You need to be on our Dinosaur Media DeathWatch™ ping list. We have been following and studying this issue extensively for over three years.
You are correct. It is a mechanical issue of distribution more than anything else. In our research, we saw a near-exact phenomenon in the early 1930s when newspapers tried to prevent radio from reporting news. For a while they succeeded - see “The Biltmore Agreement.” Radio was too popular (and so is the interweb thingy) and managed to build itself enough political clout to tell the newspapers to buzz off.
This effort by AP is akin to what the Scriptors must have said to Gutenberg 500 years ago when confronted with that newfangled printing press.
Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis - Times change and we change with them
If AP can't or doesn't want to change their mentality, the longer it tries to fight that, the less relevant it will become and will suffer more economically. Blogs are now getting a larger share of distribution of original content and third-party "news" with original (or "stale") commentary, and that's expected to continue. How are they going to fight those who hasn't paid fee to AP first, but nonetheless are commenting on the "news"? Trying to haul them into court will only make them the laughing stock and completely destroy their business model.
BTW, you might want to consider a "dinomedia" as a keyword for all your Dinosaur Media DeathWatch™ threads, to make them easy to follow. I sometimes put it in, when I see your posts.