Well, here is what might be a landmark case for the blogosphere, for the Internet, and for the future of our new media, citizen journalism. The AP has just sent a cease and desist letter to Brian C. Ledbetter telling him to stop using their copyrighted images on his website, snappedshot.com.
Snappedshot.com is a site predicated on criticism of photo-journalism. In pursuit of his criticism, Mr. Ledbetter uses photos from across the web that he thinks are doctored or misleading in some way. He then reports his opinion on the bias he sees therein.
Because of this pending legal action, snappedshot.com is now been placed on hiatus until the situation can be cleared up.
So, here is the issue facing us, folks: can we use copyrighted material under the commonly observed fair usage rules without getting hauled into court? After all, Mr. Ledbetter was not making money from his website and he used those photos in order to critique them, not to enrich himself. That would seem to be the very definition of fair use, would it not?
Now it comes down to whether use of the AP's photos in order to do social commentary and criticism is fair enough to be considered fair use?
Worse, if this tactic works, can it not be used by every mainstream news source out there to silence criticism of them?
I say we have the makings of an important ruling on whether we bloggers are free to criticize the MSM without being dragged in to court at the whim of any MSM bigwig.
We'll try to follow this story and see where it goes.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Ledbetter caved in to the Ass. Press too quickly.
February 29, 2008 - 23:28 ET by R D HelmHe should have told them to go pound sand, thus forcing the Ass. Press to go before a judge. I do not believe that Mr. Ledbetter's wish to settle this matter "amicably" is going to work, as I believe the AP is merely using this "copyright infringement" BS as it relates to photos for something a little more sinister down the road.
Let's hope that come Monday morning that Neal, Rush and Sean jump on this with both hands as well as both feet.
If the Ass. Press should somehow prevail in this, the ramifications will range
far beyond just photographs. Bad news for the blogosphere, it will be.
John McCain is a liberal. He said so himself.
Supposedly one of the
March 1, 2008 - 08:58 ET by motherbeltAss. Press? LOL Supposedly one of the reasons they are ticked off is Ledbetter's habit, when crediting AP, of filling in the words "A$$ Pirates." LOL.
I think it was at TNOYF (The Nose On Your Face) that I saw that, which, btw is one of the funniest blogs I've seen. I immediately bookmarked it. The Top 9 lists are a hoot, along with " 25 men who look like old lesbians" and "10 classic toys and why they suck."
Edit: the 25 men and 10 classic toys lists came from cracked. com....another hilarious site I discovered while checking out this story.
It's a bluff from AP. If
March 1, 2008 - 00:01 ET by ApacheIt's a bluff from AP. If they were to take him to court then their failures and incompetence would only get much more exposure. I'd suggest finding support to back him and take this as far as the AP wants to go and maybe well past that point.
Bluff or not
March 1, 2008 - 00:06 ET by SATerpThe AP apparently has a lot more money than he does, so he could be taking a big chance fighting it. This could turn into a landmark case, though, if he DOES fight it.
I hope he, or we, do....
Like I said, they are a threat
March 1, 2008 - 10:28 ET by dronetekHow long are we going to sit around complaining about it instead of actually doing something? People need to stand up and get loud or this is going to get out of anyones control.
LIBERAL FASCISM...
March 1, 2008 - 00:29 ET by danybhoyThis sounds like a form of liberal fascism to me. The AP seems to be using stongarm tactics to shut down someone who is critical of them. If the AP are allowed to succeed in this effort, the 1st Admendment will be damaged in a big way, maybe not right away, but in time, it will be used to break it down to make sure nobody is ever taken to task or offended.
That would suck, & this needs to be fought.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
If you look at the second
March 1, 2008 - 00:31 ET by WiggyIf you look at the second page of the letter, you will find the e-mail address for the schmuck that sent that letter. Gee, I wonder if he would enjoy his inbox getting flooded. ;)
I noticed that too
March 1, 2008 - 07:48 ET by ziplinedownshould be fun
Fair use
March 1, 2008 - 01:06 ET by mikeinmdThis is jusy some intimidation / bullying AP crap. What would they have come up with if he had just linked to the photo on their site and put his comments about said photo on his blog? NOTHING.
The fair use law is on his side in this one.
Blog Critics
March 1, 2008 - 01:12 ET by Ozonecharlieozonecharlie
Thank god for lawyers. They will straighten this all up.
Hot dogs walk, money talks.
If you can't read this put your glasses on!
When Fascism comes to America...
March 1, 2008 - 02:05 ET by mastersofdeceitSo this is where that Creeping Fascism went!
Whew! I'd been looking for it, I thought it was lost.
AP has found a way to make
March 1, 2008 - 02:06 ET by lnthompAP has found a way to make another coterie of lawyers richer. Is John Edwards in on this?
Lee T.
U.S. Navy (ret.) / Vancouver, Washington
The history of the race, and each individual's experience, are thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.-- Mark Twain
Perhaps NB can hire the guy if he gets shut down
March 1, 2008 - 03:04 ET by timotheI would imagine that NB could fight the AP and/or they could get the support of readership to put up a good fight.
Obviously, a big risk for Newsbusters, but there's no doubt that reports on misleading photos by news agencies fits right in NB's wheelhouse.
As an attorney, I happen to
March 1, 2008 - 03:25 ET by mostlymoderateAs an attorney, I happen to believe that the AP does not have a case against Ledbetter. Obviously they have forgotten about "Fair Use" exceptions to copyright infringement.
Copyright laws are insanely vague. The problem with these laws is that when you are threatened with an infringement, your choices are to "cease and desist" or spend lots and lots of money in court costs. Basically, big companies use this same method to silence the little guys that don't have an army of attorneys. Sad.
One more
March 1, 2008 - 03:36 ET by mostlymoderateOne more thing:
http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php
http://www.copyright...
mm,
March 1, 2008 - 03:53 ET by R D HelmSo, you see this as the AP equivalent of your basic "slap" suit.
I agree, and I hope that it blows up in the AP's face.
John McCain is a liberal. He said so himself.
Call the ACLU
March 1, 2008 - 06:07 ET by well99As much as I hate those yutts.The guy should contact them.They are always crying about 1st amendment rights.Put it to them see if they backpedal or do something.Nothing to lose but the cost of a phone call.
Just a note:It would be great if this was passed on to Fox.Put it on the TV.Put it out in the eye of the public.
well -- I loath the
March 1, 2008 - 06:56 ET by Jack Bauerwell -- I loath the DisAssociated Press.
But I don't see how this can be a 1st Amendment issue, as it is not the government proscribing against free and critical speech.
Clearly the AP owns the copyright to its own material, so this will come down to "fair usage," and the rights of A. to criticize the material of B, thereby having to use examples of B's work in order to do so.
AP is also clearly using its financial clout to overwhelm an individual with paid lawyers, thus intimidating the individual. Something the ACLU does ALL the time.
It's despicable and unhealthy and unfair -- but I don't see how it's a 1st Amendment issue.
You Can Always Knee These Bastards in the Nuts
March 1, 2008 - 08:28 ET by thoridflyIt's the _ss Press, my man ... or the _sshole Press ... or the Unsociable Press ... or the Socialist Press ... whatever you can come up with.
Oh yeah ... and the Union of Soviet Socialist Liberal Atheist Jack_sses ... greeeaaat organization.
Jack
March 1, 2008 - 17:45 ET by well99Your right.Wrote that early o clock.Still this should be out for the public.Let everyone know.
First Amendment?
March 1, 2008 - 20:10 ET by acumenWhile certainly no fan by any stretch of the AP, it is my understanding that the AP only asked SnappedShot to pay the license fee for using their materials, NOT to cease and desist using their materials.
This from Charles at LGF -- SnappedShot posted a LOT of photos. Many of his entries would include a dozen or more photos on a particular subject; I wouldn't be surprised if the total number of photos he's posted is in the thousands. This is the most likely reason why the AP chose to contact him, in my opinion; their statement about "frequent and systematic" use is key.
Further those arguing "fair use" defense, Jamie at LGF sums it up better than I -- Fair use is a four-factor test, and by my count, he fails on at least two (and probably three) of the factors, including the most important one:
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
By far, the fourth factor is the biggest one of the bunch when it comes to a court's analysis. If a viewer can see the AP's intellectual property on a non-member site rather than a site or publication that pays for its pictures, then the market and value are decreased. Moreover, he clearly fails on the third point in that he reproduces photos in their entirety. On the second point, the nature of the work is that it was produced for profit. That is, the AP created and published it for members who specifically pay for that sort of thing.
He might have a case on the first point, but even if he does, it wouldn't be enough to satisfy a court's analysis. Furthermore, the onus would be on him to prove the fair use, as it is an affirmative defense.
If we disregard who is suing who and only look at the merits of the case it doesn't bode well for the party that was using another's material without compensation. Considering the large amount of material used it seems only fair the owner of the material has a valid case. Particularly in an industry that has been experiencing decreasing revenues for years. I see this motivated more by financial reasons rather than political.
Lawyers Are Your Linemen and Fullbacks
March 1, 2008 - 08:17 ET by thoridflyThis is why OUR lawyers have to be bigger, better, meaner, more experienced, more knowledgable, more tenacious, and more dogged than THEIR (the MSM's) lawyers.
They are ALWAYS going to twist the law into a weapon they can use against those who speak out against them.
Copyright Has Exceptions
March 1, 2008 - 13:01 ET by EnDashEnDash Strange. You'd think AP is fully aware that "fair use" of copyrighted material allows for reporduction of it for the purposes of criticism -- which seems to be the case here.
Perhaps this is one of those instances where deep pockets bully small ones without regard to what is actually right or wrong, legal or illegal. Been there; had that done to me.
This is a typical purposfull misuse of the coutrs
March 1, 2008 - 13:33 ET by c5thenAny 1st year law student will realize that the Fair Use Rules means that this lawsuit will have to be thrown out by the first judge that reads it. Therefore the lawyers who brought it on behalf of their client are knowingly misusing the courts to try and bully the smaller defendant. As such, they should be disbarred.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Alan Keyes '08.
Be wary...very wary
March 1, 2008 - 17:16 ET by bigtimerBe wary...very wary indeed.
The leftists will do everything possible to control the internet and the blogs.
This is just the beginning.