Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

No, not entirely. U.S. copyright law includes a provision called “fair use” that allows for limited reproduction of copyrighted work without the copyright holder’s consent, for specific purposes.

Here is some information on it.

From the link: The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

If AP really does own the copyrights to its stories, and stories are marked as “All Rights Reserved,” then can’t AP make any rules it wants about its content? Just like commercial video creators say that their DVDs cannot be played in a public arena but only in private. This is what copyright is all about – protecting the wishes of the creators.

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

http://patterico.com/2008/06/16/ap-reports-on-marcy-tiffanys-e-mail/
http://tinyurl.com/4787sm
http://tinyurl.com/4gl8ut
http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/archives2/020592.php

Report comment to moderator

OTOH, I think this is a losing battle for these organizations and they may as well give up and try to figure out how to use it to their advantage.

Report comment to moderator

As we wait with bated breath for the Associated Press to come down from the mountain with its own rules for “fair use for bloggers,” Patrick Nielsen Hayden gives us a sense of what the AP considers fair use (found via Boing Boing). Apparently, for quite some time, the AP has had up a page that lists out prices for quoting AP text. I will quote the list prices, and hope I don’t get a DMCA takedown:

* 5-25 words: $ 12.50
* 26-50 words: $ 17.50
* 51-100 words: $ 25.00
* 101-250 words: $ 50.00
* 251 words and up: $ 100.00

Oh, and it gets better. The AP claims that it can revoke the license at any time if it feels you’re saying something negative about the Associated Press: “Publisher reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time if Publisher or its agents finds Your use of the licensed Content to be offensive and/or damaging to Publisher’s reputation.”

source

Here’s the actual AP page.

So let’s try this out.

NEW YORK (AP) — The Associated Press, following

That much is free! I love free stuff!

criticism

Aw, drat, that word just cost me $12.50.

from bloggers over an AP assertion of copyright, plans to meet this week with a bloggers’ group to help form

Oh no! Now I’m up to $17.50!!

guidelines under which AP news stories could be quoted online.
…
Kennedy said the AP had no intention of making such strict rules or setting any

51 words! That’s 25 big ones.

kind of legal standard. He also said AP was reconsidering how and when to send legal notices to bloggers in hopes of giving them “a little more leeway.”
…
Kennedy said the AP had both a journalistic concern about preventing AP news from being quoted out of context and also a business concern about protecting the value of AP’s news from being diluted if its key elements are made available from places that aren’t licensed.

“We need to protect our content, no matter who’s using it, but we also recognize that the bloggers perform a really important function on the Internet in terms of increasing the engagement of the audience online, and we want to facilitate that,” Kennedy said.

169 words all told. This blog post just cost me $50.00.

No, wait, I’m getting word that since my post is “damaging to the publisher’s reputation” I am no longer allowed to use it. Oh, well. I should have known better than to criticize.

Report comment to moderator

No more half truths, no more doctored photos, no more liberal journalistic slant, no more smear campaigns against presidents you disagre with, no more outright lies, no more plageurism.

Get caught doing this and we’ll fine the hell out of you.

Report comment to moderator