The Associated Press and 'fair use'
The Associated Press has roiled the blogosphere with a recent attempt to enforce what it deemed as an infringement of copyright laws. Last week the American news organization sent a letter to the Drudge Retort, asking the liberal link hub to remove seven items that contained long quotations from AP articles. After leading bloggers criticized the policy the AP retreated on Saturday calling their action “heavy-handed". They indicated however, that the battle wasn’t over, and that they were going to find a “positive” way to enforce their copyright.
Though Drudge Retort took down the quotes, the AP's attempt at regulating online media will probably backfire. First, with the puddle of blogs doubling every five months, going after individual blogs is the legal (and expensive) equivalent of whack-a-mole. Is it really worth the time, and more crucially, the expense, for the Associated Press to attack something as dynamic as todays blogging scene?
Legally, the AP has started something it probably can’t finish. Quotations of articles fall under the nebulous legal principle of “fair use.” Because bloggers often discuss portions of an article or respond to key quotes or assumptions made in news stories, fair use is a cornerstone of online media. Blogger Keith Schmiz makes the point that a copyright owner can't unilaterally define fair use because the concept varies from situation to situation. Without the resources to go after individual bloggers and without the power to make a universal rule, the AP is in a position of weakness. But, as intellectual property experts point out, all it will take is one successful court case agaisnt one website in order to shake bloggers.
Second, though large, the Associated Press is by no means a monopoly - Reuters, American Foreign Press, and AP’s historical rival United Press International also provide comprehensive wire services. Deutsche Presse Agenteur, Agence France Press, and China’s Xinhua news agency have thriving English language divisions. A boycott of AP stories has already begun. Michael Arrington announced yesterday a ban of AP articles on his influential blog, TechCrunch. With many prominent bloggers vehemently against intellectual property (consider the web’s influential cult of open source geeks), bloggers who feel affronted by one news agency will turn to others. Slow diversification of media sources, coupled with innovative advertising by the other wire agencies could make things more difficult for the Associated Press. Would they risk losing presumably declining ad clicks in hopes of regulation they're not sure they can uphold? Is the fight worth it?
Further Reading:
Posted in -Global- | Economic | Political | Puja Deverakonda's blog entries | email this page | printer friendly version | 
digg | 
bookmark | 
reddit
digg | bookmark | reddit
