Skip to comments.AP and 28 News Groups To Collect Fees From Aggregators
Posted on 01/06/2012 12:45:45 AM PST by prisoner6
The Associated Press and 28 other news organizations have launched a project to collect fees from aggregators who are reposting their content around the Web.
The project, knowns as NewsRight, will be a separate business that will license original news from the media companies, and collect royalties from aggregators, according to Poynter. The project was formerly known as the News Registry and News Licensing Group, and has been in the pipeline for several years now.
(Excerpt) Read more at techzwn.com ...
That about sums it up. :-)
(( ping ))
“NewsRight” is a curious choice of name for the MSM.
Just another scummy outfit looking to squeeze cash from sites doing nothing more than exercising their rights under fair use.
I hate these bastards.
FR needs to move to a P2P network with the .com site serving only to instruct people how to download and install the P2P software.
The TOR network could serve to link users to the independent P2P network and encryption would allow for anonymity and moderator control of content.
A constant level of traffic would make it nearly impossible to determine what ip posted/read/stored/forwarded what data.
It would be extremely hard to run a denial of service attack that would effect the entire P2P network.
The redundancy of the encrypted archive of data would meant that data would be impossible for anyone to expunge.
All data would be properly stored as encrypted and compressed files distributed among the users of the network. Each user would never be able to decrypt the data stored on their machine... only the network could retrieve, decrypt and present the data.... plausible deniability since the user has no way to tell what is on their machine and nobody else can look at the plaintext.
Our own cloud of patriotic information.
I would never advocate its use to store copyrighted data beyond what was supposed to be allowed under the doctrine of fair use.... It would be embarrassing if it turned into a sort of lawless Napster run by patriots :-(
It might also prove impossible for some of the technically challanged, LOL. Remember when P2P started? Napster was pretty easy but there were some - Earth Station Zero? - that not only were hard to navigate but were "fronts" for some pretty nasty stuff.
Some folks read FR on machines they don’t control and can’t load software. P2P is a problem.
It would really be best to have it operate like a normal web browser.
The cost of anonymity that would be totally immune from traffic analysis would be a constant level of bandwidth coming in and going out from every user. It would not have to be a lot of data transfer but just enough so that when something new was posted there would be no increase in outgoing transfer from the poster and no increase in incoming transfer for the viewers.
The constant level of data flow could be put to many good uses such as spreading software updates around and distributing redundant data to all users to store in their encrypted data cache on their HD.
As long as external linking to data held outside the network was also distributed and not made from the requester own machine then there would be no way to link a users online name to a particular ip address.
The larger the pool of network users the fuzzier the whole thing would become to an external entity trying to snoop on it. Once it passed a few thousand average users it would become impossible to make sense of it. For maximum security it would be ideal if all users stayed connected 24/7
Troublesome users could be banned by ip and username by moderators.
NewsRight. RightHaven. Same folks?
Agregators would have nothing to aggregate if there was no media, and aggregators make money from advertising based off the content they are re-publishing.
If the aggregators think the news feeds are worthless, they can easily stop feeding them. In our capitalist society, people have a right to charge money for their services, and others can choose to not purchase their services.
More information is needed to make sense of this. I guess Drudge is the biggest aggregator of all, but he deals mostly, or only in headlines and links. Other sites post all, or significant parts of copyrighted articles.
Most site owners like links that drive traffic to their sites, such as Drudge does. Do these new organizations plan to try and charge fees to Drudge, or only sites that repost significant portions of copyrighted material?
I, too, wondered what, if any, impact this is supposed to have on Drudge or places like Free Republic, not to mention bloggers. Sounds very much like Righthaven redivivus, though it's obviously trying to hide its trollish agenda behind a nicey-nicey costume.
Because of links on Drudge and Free Republic, I've gotten used to (and appreciative of) several foreign press outlets -- the Brit major newspapers, AFP, even Al-jazeera! It would be a hoot if news aggregators on the net began to abandon press outlets of US newspapers and news agents (such as AP, Reuters, etc.) and provided links mostly or only to non-USA news organizations.