Comments
AP Goes After Bloggers For Posting Article Headlines And Snippets
Written By Tyme on Jun. 16, 2008.
3 Comments
Report Note
+ Clip This
From the Clip AP Goes After Bloggers For Posting Article Headlines And Snippets posted by Tyme:
Rather than just going after the big aggregators (surprisingly, Google settled), it appears that the Associated Press is going after bloggers for merely posting a linked headline and a tiny snippet of text from the article.
An update to the TechDirt article says:
Update 2: I should also note that the comment from the AP includes what appears to be a bit of a sales pitch suggesting that bloggers license AP articles.
Doesn't it always come down to money?
From a NYT article it seemed like Drudge Retort was using a small amount of text in their links:
“It’s hard to see how the Drudge Retort ‘first few lines’ is a substitute for the story,” Mr. Wu said.
I went to Drudge and noticed they use large amounts of text spread over a large area. A "few lines" can equal almost 1/3 of the originating article. I don't know the ratios on the AP articles, but do you think that is fair use? With that much text is it necessary to click over and read the article in full to get the gist of it?
More important, if you have a blog, what do you consider fair use of your content? Would you be comfortable if someone took 1/3 of your article and used it on their site?
Personally, I would be more concerned with summarizing the article to the point of not having to click over...I think. I'm going to give this some thought not only how I write articles but how I want people to use my content.
Scrivs
Written Jun. 16, 2008 / Report /
To be fair the only way major sites get AP news is by licensing the content so I can see why the AP would be mad if a great deal of their content is being posted on a site. If we are talking small summaries as seen in Clips then I would think it would only help them.
Oli
Written Jun. 16, 2008 / Report /
Well given the success other media companies have had limiting the "fair" usage of their own media (I'm talking video and audio -- RIAA, MPAA, et al) I'm not too shocked that they're trying to cash in.
To report you almost always have to quote in some fashion and the copyright laws allow for this through fair use. The difference between infringement and fair is substantially subjective though but I don't think I could possibly say that the drudge example you gave was that bad. It was partially rewritten.
I should add that clearly quoting and citing doesn't affect things in terms of fair use.
I think the most important part about all this is consideration #1: "the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;"
Drudge (and a billion other sites) aren't using this content to replace the destination of their outbound links - they're there to give them context and even help drive more people out. I think bloggers and link-dump sites are on pretty strong ground under that consideration... But it's something that would have to be tested in court.
The AP issuing guidelines seems completely arrogant but it might help some people who are less familiar with the letter of the law. I'm sure there are plenty of people ripping "too much" from AP articles but I don't see how what Digg or DT (or Clips, for that matter) do would need rehashing.
By the sounds of things, they want to completely nuke any quoting and leave it at a title + link... Fat chance that'll happen.
Tyme
Written Jun. 16, 2008 / Report /
One of the DMCA requests was for a 18 word quote from Hillary Clinton. That's ridiculous. The way AP worked: sites paid for the distribution rights, bloggers linked to those sites allowing them to create revenue, and AP stories (and brand) was increased in the process. Sure there are thousands of sites linking to their content but that is needed for the sites paying the distribution fees to make money.
What they did (with the DMCA) was stopped Yahoo's traffic (the DMCA sited their site) and reduced their traffic. That's cold.
I'm not sure if this is legitimate but the AP Vice President responded to TechCrunch's article suggesting bloggers stop using AP:
The truth is further down and I was typing it when I decided to check his site. He has successfully gone on APs turf and has started breaking news just like AP does. He interviewed with the presidential candidates and he was on NBC I think last week. He is slowly crossing over to main stream. With others crossing over as well. Odd that they are worried about links instead worry about bloggers creating competing content.