The Chairman of the Associated Press had some sharp words for those darned ol' Internet interlopers out there. He said he's "mad as hell" over those who "walk off with our work." Though Chairman Dean Singleton didn't exactly specify who he was talking about, according to Politico, the wire agency has been targeting Google, Bloggers and news aggregator sites such as Huffington Post of late.
So, what does it mean? How far will the AP go to protect its work? Are there court cases soon to be seen?
Singleton signaled that the AP is ready to go further to prove that the world's oldest news organization won't be put out to pasture by the new media. But Seagrave stressed that while there is an enforcement aspect to the AP’s new initiative, it’s really “more affirmative than punitive.”
And, once again, we come down to questions of what "fair use" means. Is it on solid legal footing? Many say it isn't.
“In copyright law,” said another attorney who’s represented top media companies, “fair use is one of the major fuzzy lines.”
Now, here is the thing. If we here link a story and then deconstruct it for our readers, if we critique it, doesn't it almost always lead to the readers here clicking over to the original source so that a comparison can be made between our interpretation and the original? In this case, the original source is still getting credit for the story AND getting traffic to see it. Isn't it the best of all worlds? Aren't they losing nothing and actually gaining eyes to their story that otherwise would never blink once at their content?
Seems to me that in the case of bloggers and news aggregators, they are getting free advertising for their work. Now, I can understand that a full copy of a story without linking to the original source would be a violation of use. But bloggers and news aggregators would seem to me to be a boon to the struggling news industry.
In any case, this story is one we should all watch closely because it really could affect us. The AP may not be expected to go after small bloggers, but it surely could go after big sites like NewsBusters.org!
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
AP is acting just as
April 11, 2009 - 21:49 ET by mostlymoderateAP is acting just as conceited as the recording industry did in regards to Napster, filesharing, mp3 etc. The AP is a dying brand just like newspapers themselves. Online content is where the future is. That also means AP is going to have to "adapt" or get out of the way.
If I was the search engines like Google or Yahoo, I would create an algorithm that placed all AP content at the very bottom of the search results. See how they like that.
The days of one monopolized news service that is out of touch with its readers is history.
mm... I agree with
April 11, 2009 - 22:22 ET by bigtimermm...
I agree with you...especially your last line.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
It's so true isn't it
April 12, 2009 - 02:41 ET by mostlymoderateIt's so true isn't it Bigtimer?! :)
Sign of a Failing Business
April 13, 2009 - 07:26 ET by allanfA failing business usually becomes very agressive about collections and payment terms with its customers. AP's position is an indication that its health is not good.
I think AP's actions come from desparation and a hope that smaller firms can be intimidated into licensing arrangements they are not legally obligated to enter into.
You don't really think that AP wants all of its reporting de-listed from Google.
They're Missing An Opportunity
April 11, 2009 - 22:11 ET by kmorrisonThey need links to garner traffic, and they have almost no hope of enforcing a 'no quoting' rule. They need to rethink this policy as their not doing themselves any favors.
Broad Side of the Barn
Purple People
How Much Does AP Subscription Cost?
April 11, 2009 - 23:17 ET by zeestephenWarner Todd,
How much would NewsBusters have to pay for an AP subscription?
How
April 11, 2009 - 23:24 ET by Warner Todd HustonHow much is it WORTH is the main question!
LOL
What it's worth
April 12, 2009 - 13:35 ET by nofateis only what you are willing to pay for bias and statist spin. It would be easy enough to just reference the article in a link and rather than quote it, paraphrase the needed sections. They get their traffic from those of us who want to be informed, and no actual quotes are used, at least here at NB. They certainly keep their blinders in close.
"The future is not set. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."
michaelyon-online.com
Look...here's the thing
April 11, 2009 - 23:19 ET by seanrobinsLook...here's the thing with AP as I see it. AP has pretty poor overall reliability. Citing and quoting AP stuff comes under two primary uses: First, for its humor value. Second, for its critique value, as highly representative leftist media.
Should anyone be citing to an AP story (as least political stories) in reliance upon its substance?
No. I think "fair use" adequately covers humor and critique.
sean robins
blog.seanrobins.com
I agree, Sean
April 12, 2009 - 00:03 ET by Scout FinchI only quote AP when I want to present an example of bias or improper journalism.
No one in their right mind would quote AP (or Reuters for that matter) to share quality journalism and news.
I can go straight to Obama's WH web page to get the Democrat talking points from the source. Why bother with AP or Reuters?
Why do I get the feeling...
April 12, 2009 - 05:22 ET by jdripperWhen the AP does go into court it won't be against any liberal organization. This seems a bit pat to me.
Jack
"If at age 20 you are a conservative then you have no heart. If at age 30 you are a liberal then you have no brains." Sir Winston Churchill
Funny, I would like my
April 12, 2009 - 08:23 ET by dscottFunny, I would like my articles to be quoted with proper attribution such as via a link. If the AP is quoting a public figure or disseminating false information, they have no right under the law to challenge anyone who attributes their work. More over it is settled law you can photocopy any article for educational purposes.
What the AP is doing is a shameless intimidation tactic with the threat of a costly frivolous lawsuit to create an atmosphere of fear where they know they don't have a legal leg to stand upon.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
What's to get mad about?
April 12, 2009 - 08:53 ET by slickwillie2001I've been following this story now for a week or so, and I agree, it makes no sense. These aggregators are not taking the whole article, just the headline and a couple of intro lines. They are driving hits to the source of the article. A very few blogs not mentioned in the article do take the entire thing, which they should not do, but that is a minority of very low-traffic sites.
Being 'mad as hell' over this is like a business being angry that they got put in the phone book. What am I missing here?
Associated Press? What a joke!
April 12, 2009 - 13:41 ET by jefflebowskiI would rather link to the Iran Daily News than AP on Angry White Dude. I only link to the NY Slimes when I'm making fun of them. Know where I first found out about the release of the American hostage in Somalia? Twitter! The old media is dead! Long live the new media!
Angry White Dude
www.angrywhitedude.c...
What about Rupert being mad as hell at Google?!?
April 12, 2009 - 15:11 ET by E.S.BlofeldWarner,
First post here on NB...
Why not add Rupert Murdoch to the list with the AP?
It seems like the same argument...
"Rupert Murdoch threw down the gauntlet to Google
Thursday, accusing the search giant of poaching content it doesn't own
and urging media outlets to fight back. "Should we be allowing Google
to steal all our copyrights?" asked the News Corp. chief at a
cable industry confab in Washington, D.C., Thursday. The answer, said
Murdoch, should be, " 'Thanks, but no thanks.' "
It seems like a lot of money is being lost and the News Moguls want their cut, so to speak.
What would happen if Rupert were to charge NB? Would NB stop helping Rupert?
Ernst
Not sure what was Murdoch's
April 12, 2009 - 16:25 ET by dscottNot sure what was Murdoch's complaint (you need to provide a link for us to read about it), however, when you do a search on google news, if you place FNC in the advanced search under news carrier, nothing shows up. On the other had if you put FOXNEWS, FNC does show up. Obviously, google and Murdock have worked out their differences and it seems it was via PROPER attribution via a link.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Umm...
April 12, 2009 - 18:24 ET by Warner Todd HustonMaybe it's because the story was about the AP and Murdooch has nothing to do with the AP?
Be sure and visit my home blog PubliusForum.com.
Don't Complain, -Compete
April 12, 2009 - 15:24 ET by slickwillie2001A more effective response might be for AP or Fox News to throw together a search engine and/or an email service. If Fox News had a search engine that worked well, had a simple quick page to enter your search on, and guaranteed no political bias in search results, they might have something.
Stephen Colbert had Phil Bronstein as his guest on April 8.
April 12, 2009 - 16:55 ET by Rush FanMr. Bronstein, the ex-husband of Sharon Stone, was the executive vice president and editor of the San Francisco Chronicle. He and Colbert discussed the decline of the print media, the difficulty of newspapers to make a profit online, and why the news business is upset that Google, the Huffington Post, and bloggers are using their material for free. Bronstein indicated that he felt it was a mistake when the newspapers first created an online edition years ago to provide the online editions for free.
I laughed when he asked Colbert what would happen if newspapers went out of business and there were no journalists to do the investigative reporting. I immediately thought to myself, where was the investigative reporting when it came to vetting Barack Obama, or Sen. Chris Dodd, or Rep. Barney Frank?
The only investigations the old media hungers to perform is when it comes to Republicans and conservatives, such as Gov. Sarah Palin, President George W. Bush, Karl Rove, Vice President Cheney and Rush Limbaugh to name just a few. Good riddance to old media and their liberal "journalists."
You can find the video of Colbert's interview with Bronstein here.
Lastly, I do agree that sites such as Drudge, NewsBusters (and even the Huffington Post) benefit the AP and other online news organizations by providing links to the original source, just as I have with my link to Colbert's interview at Comedy Central.
----------------------------------------------------
“The media is a disgrace. You have forfeited any notion that you once had of respect” ~ Rush Limbaugh
Never
April 12, 2009 - 18:26 ET by Warner Todd HustonNever will you catch me watching Colbert or Stewart. I couldn't be LESS interested in these so-called "comedy" shows. Further, anyone that goes on them as a guest is either a left-wing shill or a fool.
Be sure and visit my home blog PubliusForum.com.
Warner - You and I agree on Colbert and Stewart. I've read your
April 12, 2009 - 19:57 ET by Rush Fanposts long enough to know that we also agree on Olbermann, Matthews, and the rest of the leftist media. I was skimming through the channels when I came upon Bronstein describing the rise and fall of the print media. How could I resist stopping and listening to the chatter, since I have been rooting for the fall of the liberal media for quite some time.
Thanks for the link to your blog. I have added it to my special blog sites. Also let me take this opportunity to thank you for your always informative posts.
Happy Easter
------------------------------------------------------------------
“They have plunged to such depths of incompetence and unprofessionalism and ignorance, it's actually hard for me to come up with accurate words to describe what has happened to them,…” ~ Rush Limbaugh on the media
Skip the American papers, go straight to the UK.
April 13, 2009 - 07:15 ET by thebutlerdiditYou can get a closer to the truth story from across the pond, than here. The Telegraph is the best, of course. However, the Daily Mail has the best gossip posts. Funny how their papers are still doing well in the advent of the internet, wonder why that is? Could it be the papers write what people want to read?
O/T, I am thinking of starting my own blog, but only if I can call it John Bolton's Mustache Sleeps Here, what do ya'll think?
All a Democrat needs is the upper-story window of public attention and the chamber pot of rhetoric. How else to explain the rise of Joe Biden? P.J. O' Rourke
I believe that less than
April 13, 2009 - 13:30 ET by RR GOPI believe that less than significant portions can be copied for discussion.
But, there again, I didn't go to college to learn how to chase down ambulances, so what do I know?
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).