Posted on 06/17/2008 12:33:32 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
As we wait with bated breath for the Associated Press to come down from the mountain with its own rules for "fair use for bloggers," Patrick Nielsen Hayden gives us a sense of what the AP considers fair use (found via Boing Boing). Apparently, for quite some time, the AP has had up a page that lists out prices for quoting AP text. I will quote the list prices, and hope I don't get a DMCA takedown:
Oh, and it gets better. The AP claims that it can revoke the license at any time if it feels you're saying something negative about the Associated Press: "Publisher reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time if Publisher or its agents finds Your use of the licensed Content to be offensive and/or damaging to Publisher’s reputation."
Now, these are the terms that the AP has had on its site for some time -- but they explain why the AP went after the Drudge Retort for quoting less than 100 words. To the AP, that was a violation requiring a $25 license. So, while some believe that those criticizing the AP are overreacting, I'd argue that's not the case at all. This is not, as suggested, a one-time thing. This is an ongoing pattern of misuse of copyright law by the AP. And it's been pointed out to the AP in the past that these actions are wrong -- and it did nothing to change the AP's behavior. Instead, it seems to have only emboldened the AP.
Besides, it now appears that the AP's way of having this "conversation" with bloggers on what is AP-acceptable "fair use" is to meet with some guy who represents some blogging "group" I've never heard of. That group does not represent bloggers and it certainly doesn't speak for all of us in reaching some sort of "agreement." If the AP really wants to engage with the critics, why doesn't it come out and talk to those of us criticizing its actions? So far, the only engagement has been to cut and past the same comment on a bunch of blog sites... Other than that, it has only spoken to reporters about this issue.
Ha! AP is in a hole and throwing dirt on itself, LOL.
Is it ok if we just link to their stuff without quoting (and - of course, without fail - add the AsininePr*cks keyword?)
I don’t see how this can possibly pass First Amendment rights to free discussion of issues. If the AP puts information into the public domain, the public should have a right to address what it has said. How do you do that without quoting more than four words.
What the A.P. seems to want is a society where it and only it can desminate ‘truth’, and if anyone dares object, they deserve a fine based on how boldly they take it to task.
If you disagree with just one issue, you can’t even address it without breaking A.P.’s rules. And if you have issues with five or six things within an article (which isn’t all that infrequent), there’s no way you could address them without mentioning what A.P. said in the first place. Chaching! Chaching! Chaching!
You can’t even quote a headline that’s longer than four words.
Screw that nose. To hell with them. Papers pick up what they have published. We’ll address the issues from there.
Heaven only knows what this SCOTUS would rule on an issue like this, with their heads so firmly implanted.
So, the AssPress doesn’t want us saying bad things about them, huh?
The AP's new policy also offers hefty rewards for people to rat each other out for violations.
Charming.
How ridiculous!
I always knew Jim Rob could do that...
We can have better threads posting what was left out of the AP report. That’s the part I always liked best anyway.
Is AP one word or two?
I can’t afford a $12.50 mistake.
AP Annual Meeting and Luncheon / April 14, 2008
Guest speakers were ....
.......wait for it .....
....yep thats right .... ! .....
John McCain and Barack Obama
I don’t believe the Associated Press is due the respect of their initials “AP”.
I ALWAYS refer to them as the ASS Press.
It is your site, JimRob, and I/we will abide your conditions. But as a frequent excerpter of AP stories on a different website (www.theacru.org), I'd suggest that the proper response is to stick it in the nose of the AP by continuing to make fair use quotations from articles.
Congressman Billybob
Latest article, "Gravity: Not Just a Good Idea, It's the Law"
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/is-the-ap-good-for-america/
Our friends at PajamasMedia have similar questions ...
Is the Associated Press Good for America?
Hows about 5 cents for 1250 words.
What rate of royalty does the AP pay to
those whose words and actions
the AP chronicles for its private gain ?
I want to write for them.
At those rates, I figure my poem “Before There Was Dirt” should net me $6000.
I guess I’d have to let the regular length ones go for a hundred apiece. That seems fair.
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.