AP’s idea of ‘fair use’ limits you to four words or less

5 thoughts on “AP’s idea of ‘fair use’ limits you to four words or less”

  1. You have to look at it from the other side, too. How can AP fight the tiny little thefts of 1000000000000 small independent bloggers?

    I can’t see why a blogger should use AP’s words at all. If I want an AP story for my blog, I’ll have to rewrite all of it in my own terms. Why not?

    But I realize that the very idea of money for creative work is at issue. I have been told that even the greatest opera singers can’t sell their records anymore. Painters and cartoonists won’t get paid even by the big newspapers anymore, because the publishers can get pictures for free from people who wish to be published. And agents get buried under tons of manuscripts looking for publishers.

    I could imagine a world without those publishers, but not without organizations of the AP kind.
    I can imagine linking to an AP story to provide additional information on a subject I’m writing about, or including a short quote from AP, with attribution, to make a point. It would be secondary to my own writing, of course, included as a confirmation of what I’m saying. I would not have thought about whether to quote a headline or lede if I hadn’t read about this controversy.

    AP could try to go after all those thousands of tiny bloggers, much as RIAA went after Napster users for pirating music. But it’s expensive, time-consuming, and except where examples are made of a few individuals, not particularly worthwhile as a deterrant to others. Both AP and RIAA need to accept that the technology is changing and the best thing they can do is get busy and find their new niches in this new century. Otherwise they may find themselves going the way of the dinosaurs.

  2. I can’t believe this. What do they want, for bloggers and other sites to stop linking to them altogether? Because it seems that’s where it will lead. I think it’s a bad move on their part.
    Pretty incredible, isn’t it? I can see arguments on both sides of the issue, and I’m not really sure where a fair middle ground would be. AP can’t rewrite the copyright laws to suit their own purposes, nor should they be allowed to intimidate bloggers who legitimately quote small bits of text while giving AP full credit and a link. On the other hand, AP is certainly entitled to some kind of copyright protection. It’s going to be interesting to see how this works out.

... and that's my two cents