AP Looking to Stop Unauthorized Internet Usage?

By Warner Todd Huston (Bio | Archive)
April 7, 2009 - 01:55 ET
  • Bookmark and Share

When you visit NewsBusters.org and read a report taking the Associated Press to task for its continuous leftward bias, are you reading "stolen" AP content, or are you reading legitimate news? Is criticism of AP's work fair use? What is "fair use," anyway? Could the AP sue critics?

These questions might be on the AP's radar if a recent report in The New York Times is any indication. AP is attempting to create new policies to govern who uses AP content and where it is used. The APs attention to these issues could have long range impact on blogs and newsfeeds on the Internet.

Thus far, the actual policies and goals and how the AP will tackle this aspect of its business have not been determined. Are they going to take on the definition of "fair use" to court? Is the AP going to go after any particular agency or news site for what it considers unauthorized use?

It seems that Google is one of APs targets and that is a target that news agencies in other countries have already taken on. A few nations have already demanded that Google pay fees or stop excerpting and web searching hits of their domestic news sources.

But, how far will all of this go? Will the AP go so far as to track down just any website that used excerpts of AP wire copy? Will AP take on "fair use" and determine any usage at all is unauthorized? Could NewsBusters or other sites that use AP columns a grist for their own type of work end up in court?

Since no one has really ever tried to test these ideas in court, it really is all up in the air legally. In any case, it is something to watch carefully.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

So if they cannot charge for use...

April 7, 2009 - 04:54 ET by Jcon96

I assume, since the AP lost out on their stupid "pay to quote" system, they will now try and crack down on the twisted interpritation of "fair use"

 

A one stop location for the AP's previous attempts at (this brand) of stupidity:

http://michellemalki...

Unintended consequences....

April 7, 2009 - 06:38 ET by motherbelt

As usual, MM nails it!

Gotta watch out for that "goose and gander" thing!  LOL

They might say "Wow, that sucks!"  But at least they'll say "Wow!"  -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes

They already went after LiveLeak.

April 7, 2009 - 07:22 ET by dronetek

I made a huge post on their forums that showed how the AP removes party affiliation when its a democrat and the LL mods were forced to remove all my quotes and links. 

Fair Use and a Failing Business.

April 7, 2009 - 08:35 ET by allanf

There is a  well established doctrine in copyright law called "Fair Use".  Others may make use of a copyrighted work for limited purposes such as criticism or parody. The "fair use" exception is what allows TiVo, VCRs and other recording devices to flourish.

An important recent case on Fair Use was Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music (92-1292), 510 U.S. 569 (1994).   The most significant aspect of the ruling was that it was unamimous. The Court held that a parody of the song "Pretty Woman" was permissible Fair Use of the original work.

AP can litigate. It may find some district court judges and even Court of Appeals judges to side with their position. The Supreme Court will weigh the chilling effect of APs position on speech with the damage done to AP through this usage.

Given the Accu-Rose decision AP may be spending tens of millions in legal fees to come away empty handed.

Stupid is ...

April 7, 2009 - 08:00 ET by Crash

It reminds me of the record companies resistance and ultimate collapse; due to their reluctance to use technology as a tool. If AP pushes to charge internet users, news outlets will find a service which allows freedom of the press. 

What's the problem with this?

April 7, 2009 - 08:00 ET by BlueCat57

The AP wants to charge for all use of its content.

Their customers are failing newspapers and barely watched news broadcasts.

Other users are liberals who see no moral problem with stealing content.

Their customers can't afford to or won't pay for the content.

The AP goes out of business.

Successful news organizations start using less biased news services for content making them profitable.

So, where's the problem?

Problem

April 7, 2009 - 08:47 ET by allanf

Short quotes of a work for the purpose of criticism have long been regarded as "fair use" of that work and not a copyright law violation.

The problem comes when a larger organization uses it size to force you to sign a  licensing agreement that reduces your rights,  or litigating this a settled point of law in the courts at a cost of millions of dollars.

Where will this stop?

April 7, 2009 - 09:01 ET by ConservativeMissourian

If the AP wants to charge for their content, it will probably lead them to going out of business. And then news sources that are less biased may provide others with news; that would be great.  But the point is that it is "fair use" of their content to report on it and expose any biases that are there.  If they are that worried about their news being reported and comments made about it, then maybe those at AP should consider straightening up their reporting.  Google is a search engine.  If your information is on the web and it is searched, it should come up on Google.  If you have that big of a problem with that, then don't put things on the internet you want to keep some from seeing.

Sounds like the AP is in desperate financial straights

April 7, 2009 - 09:16 ET by R D Helm

Which means they are swirling near the bottom of the loo with a bunch of other "traditional" news operations.

We'll start hearing anguished cries for an AP government bailout in 5....4....3....2...1.

-Dave

This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.

Excerpting and linking to original content

April 7, 2009 - 12:03 ET by OxyCon

...should be regarded as fair use and should be welcomed as it drives Internet traffic, and thusly revenue, to the original source of content. I think in court the case could be made that there are no negative consequences to the content provider, only beneficial ones.

Obama control the internet?

April 7, 2009 - 12:58 ET by bigtimer

WTH...

You think this information you wrote is or could be intimidating with the threat from the AP...read this...congress-critter leftists busy little bees at work behind the scenes...this is one very troubling article...good Old Rocky and Snowe....nice little bill they have here...

There is no way the leftist govt. isn't going to NOT get their paws into the internet with control.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=93966

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

Brilliantly played.   If

April 7, 2009 - 13:39 ET by dborschjr68

Brilliantly played.   If it works, of course.

Were I to be in charge of AP, I would definitely limit who gets access to my stories.  First on my "Poo-Poo on them" list would be Newsbusters.org. 

Then I would target other sites, those rife with dissention and pointed-government-accountability, eventually stopping all flow of my leftist articles into the camps of the free-thinking and exceptionally intelligent Conservative masses.

Wow, like Newsbusters, for example.  Imagine that.