AP, blogs, and ‘fair use’

For a blog to feature news content from an Associated Press article is about as common as the sunrise, so it came as something of a surprise last week when the news agency went after a prominent liberal blog for what seemed like a minor excerpting issue.

Last week, The A.P. took an unusually strict position against quotation of its work, sending a letter to the Drudge Retort asking it to remove seven items that contained quotations from A.P. articles ranging from 39 to 79 words.

On Saturday, The A.P. retreated. Jim Kennedy, vice president and strategy director of The A.P., said in an interview that the news organization had decided that its letter to the Drudge Retort was “heavy-handed” and that The A.P. was going to rethink its policies toward bloggers.

The quick about-face came, he said, because a number of well-known bloggers started criticizing its policy, claiming it would undercut the active discussion of the news that rages on sites, big and small, across the Internet.

Well, of course it would. The AP is one of the most commonly linked to news outlets on the planet. If bloggers can’t excerpt 79 words from an article, it’s going to have an effect. It was encouraging that the AP realized that its aggressive posturing towards the Drudge Retort was, in fact, “heavy-handed.”

The result, according to the NYT, is an effort on the part of the Associated Press to “define clear standards as to how much of its articles and broadcasts bloggers and Web sites can excerpt without infringing on The A.P.’s copyright.”

That’s probably a good idea, though I’m not sure if the standards are going to be a step in the right direction or not.

For example, the AP conceded a “heavy-handed” approach to the Drudge Retort, but the news outlet nevertheless believes it’s right to go after blogs “when we feel the use is more reproduction than reference, or when others are encouraged to cut and paste.”

In fact, the AP’s Kennedy still expects the Drudge Retort to remove the seven items. In this sense, the AP regrets the tone of its demands, but not the substance.

Even if The A.P. sets standards, bloggers could choose to use more content than its standards permit, and then The A.P. would have to decide whether to take legal action against them. One important legal test of whether an excerpt exceeds fair use is if it causes financial harm to the copyright owner.

“The principal question is whether the excerpt is a substitute for the story, or some established adaptation of the story,” said Timothy Wu, a professor at the Columbia Law School. Mr. Wu said that the case is not clear-cut, but he believes that The A.P. is likely to lose a court case to assert a claim on that issue.

“It’s hard to see how the Drudge Retort ‘first few lines’ is a substitute for the story,” Mr. Wu said.

Kennedy responded by telling the Times that the AP believes “that in some cases, the essence of an article can be encapsulated in very few words.”

So, what is it, exactly, that the AP plans to do? It feels bad about the heavy-handed letters, but it expects the heavy-handed demands to be met. It doesn’t want to sue bloggers, but it will enforce its copyright protections. It wants AP content to be part of the online discussion, but not if AP content can be encapsulated in a few words.

The Associated Press is going to figure all of this out and establish a new policy. We’ll see how that turns out.

This is going to work out as well as the “Times Select” thing the NY Times tried a while back with its columnists. People just stopped reading them and linking them, and they lost influence.

  • Drudge is a “liberal blogger”? I am amazed. Never actually been on the site, but I thought it was conservative! I guess trash knows no political boundaries….

  • It’s a pretty comlpex issue – people are reading newspapers for free – will that impact whatever quality is left?

    “Drudge Retort” – misspelling or Feudian slip?

  • This is just a symptom of what is probably going to be a worse and worse problem.. mainstream news is losing viewers/readers to the blogosphere, but the blogosphere doesn’t actually do much of any investigative reporting – it just links to the MSM. So the blogs are killing the MSM, but also need it to exist..

  • PJ, that’s Drudge Retort. Heh. Took me a second to catch that.

    I’m not surprised news outlets are lashing out like this. It’s sort of like the RIAA’s response to file sharing. “Offer a better (or cheaper) product? Never! We’ll just sue your ass!”

    Should be interesting.

    Kennedy responded by telling the Times that the AP believes “that in some cases, the essence of an article can be encapsulated in very few words.”

    Why not? The reporter has already spun a very few words, zero research and a pinch of substance into an entire article.

    Jerk.

  • Re: 2:

    “Drudge is a “liberal blogger”? ”

    Yeah, that’s exactly what I thought. I’ve been to his site before – right-wing pure and simple.

    More importantlyfor readers of CB (and Steve as well), people like Drudge are a source for nothing, and need to be avoided like the plague.

  • I guess the AP will now try to keep their crappy stories under 39 words.

    No great loss there.

  • Kennedy responded by telling the Times that the AP believes “that in some cases, the essence of an article can be encapsulated in very few words.”

    The only problem with that is that copyright doesn’t cover the “essence of an article,” only the actual text. There’s a very strong case for fair use here. Regardless of what the AP might like to think.

  • The funny thing is that the Drudge Retort grabbed drudge.com domain before Drudge did.

    Solution: Quote McClatchy.

  • AP is backing off because they finally—FINALLY realized that they’re no longer the primo news outlet on the planet (as if they ever were). The blogosphere is now organized enough to simply establish an alternative set of sources to AP, material, and then cite those sources directly. AP becomes the excess ballast, gets ejected, and flies with all the grace of a lead balloon.

    Or have we all so easily forgotten the fall of that once-renowned titan, now Moonie-mush peddler, UPI?

  • It’s telling that an old dead-tree journalism era organization like AP admits that the only part of what they write that matters is the first few lines. Now we know that when a newspaper person says someone ‘buried the lede’ they truly mean buried!

  • This just in: People smarter than journalists give them credit for being, refuse to swallow BS:

    NEW YORK – Americans dissatisfied with political sound bites are turning to the Internet for a more complete picture, a new study finds.

    In a report Sunday, the Pew Internet and American Life Project said that nearly 30 percent of adults have used the Internet to read or watch unfiltered campaign material — footage of debates, position papers, announcements and transcripts of speeches.

    “They want to see the full-blown campaign event. They want to read the speech from beginning to end,” said Lee Rainie, director of the Pew group. “It’s a push back from the sound-bite culture.”

    Pew also found online fundraising is up — 6 percent of adults have contributed to a campaign using the Internet, compared with 2 percent in 2004.

    The Internet has allowed campaigns to reach first-time donors without the expense of direct mail or phone calls. Democrat Barack Obama has been particularly adept at generating small donations from a vast number of Internet users to become the fundraising leader among all the presidential candidates.

    Pew found that among Internet users, Obama supporters were about twice as likely as backers of Democratic rival Hillary Rodham Clinton and Republican John McCain to have made a campaign contribution online.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080615/ap_on_hi_te/internet_politics

    If that doesn’t scare the crap out of the GOP nothing will. 300% growth in three years, with 2/3rds of it going to Obama? Now that we have Hillary’s people too, what’s the breakout going to be? 1/4 McCain 3/4 Obama?

  • In fact start a movement. Quote McClatchy and let AP serve their rightwing masters.

    Get a logo: 99% AP Free. Or McClatchy the honest news service (unlike AP)

    Give McClatchy a boost and screw the APooch.

  • From now on, at my blog I’m going to quote AP articles in total and then redact all but 78 random words.

  • This old-style copyright stuff is quite a tricky nut to crack. Viacom is threatening to gut YouTube, RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) are hot on the heels of file-sharers, and now AP wants to block bloggers. There’s something sick in the state of copyright. Last century’s laws no longer apply to this century’s technology. It’s not hard to guess which eventually will change.
    TR @1 pointed to the crux of the matter. Intellectual property owners sound their own death knell when they become heavy- or even light-handed with users of their material. Cutters and pasters just go else where, and the new site gets a rocket boost in advertising revenue. The other misconception on the part of corporate owners, when calculating loss to piracy, for example, is that everyone who downloads has the option to buy. Most downloaders don’t have that option and so the material is simply lost to view. If you can easily afford to purchase a movie on DVD or a software package or music album you just don’t bother with the tedium of organizing, searching and waiting for a download.
    Exposure is the new currency.

  • Dale, you’re the true activist! Spot on. It seems so easy when it’s spelled out.

  • AP rolls out its new Internet strategy for the ’90s: “Don’t ever link to us or we’ll sue your sorry ass!”

    Brilliant, guys. Imagine where Google would be by now if only they’d thought of it.

    I expect this is a problem that includes its own solution.

  • AP has been all sorts of sucky lately. Nedra Pickler amyone? Do what Dale suggested, pick 78 random words from an AP article and then link to McClatchy. Problem solved.

  • Michael Arrington and other critics of the Associated Press’ policies are now calling for a boycott of all A.P. stories. However, such cyberactivists ought to realize that, to protect open communication, loud public criticism serves them better than a boycott of the very information they are trying to defend.

    Nobody’s boycotting the news Rob, they’re boycotting the AP. It’s not like there aren’t other news organizations out there to quote. The AP doesn’t own the news, it just thinks it does.

  • It doesn’t matter what the AP likes or doesn’t like – current copyright provides for fair use for this sort of thing without the copyright holder’s permission. Any “guidelines” they come up with are entirely voluntary if they’re any stricter than what the law allows.

  • *Snerk* I suppose the next step would be to have click-through entry screens with boilerplate end user agreements before you got to read anything on the site. Let’s see how long they try to enforce this latest strain of copyright-ignorant idiocy before everyone defects to Reuters, hmmm?

  • The American broadcast and print media are nothing more than a bill board for the
    government , “The Defense (War) department sez”, “The Labor department sez . On and on and now if most Americans don’t trust their leaders – You go figure.

  • The AP created this scenario specifically to destroy Fair Use.

    This is how it works:
    The AP makes a big stink about a single website and then after the blogsphere begins to fight back, they put on the Mr. Nice Guy routine and offer to negotiate a new set of rules… for them, by them. It effectively trashes Fair Use and cripples bloggers. Win-win… for them.

    They would come out smelling like a rose… except that bloggers will not be signing on to whatever abomination that Media Bloggers Association tries to shoehorn in place of Fair Use.

  • This is Irene from AP legal.

    Please remove this story or I’ll sue your ass so hard you’ll be scrounging copper from foreclosed houses to pay your legal bills.

    You have no idea how hard we can rape you. And yes, that does mean that I will pay large black men using AP money to rape you.

    This probably won’t be fun for you.

    This is your DMCA takedown notice. Take this down or it’ll be “My Sharona” for you, my friend.

  • Comments are closed.