AP follows RIAA and MPAA into the gutter
Last week, the Associated Press sent seven DMCA take-down notices to the Drudge Retort (a liberal counterpoint to that other Drudge) based solely on the fact that they had posted short excerpts of AP wire stories. After some pretty significant blowback (and a boycott of their content), the AP decided it might not be in their best interests to alienate a significant source of their traffic, so they've magnanimously decided to publish their very own interpretation of what "fair use" actually means for us simple-minded bloggers.
Someone needs to inform the AP that they don't get to decide what constitutes "fair use." That's up to the Supreme Court.
On a more practical and immediate level, Terry Heaton says this:
The real problem for the A.P. is that it can’t win this argument, and by pressing the issue, they’re very likely to end up with a business model that dies overnight. And I don’t think I’m overstating that. Links are the currency of the Web, and the A.P. hard line spits in the face of that, which is leading to boycotts like Arrington’s. The monopoly co-operative is living in the past, but it needs that past to validate a business model that is as out-of-date as traditional media itself. Now, by pressing the matter, they run the significant risk of being in a contrary legal position, and what will be left for them after that?
I think the answer to that last question is pretty simple: they'll follow RIAA and MPAA into the gutter by attempting to sue their customers into submission. It isn't working for RIAA, it isn't working for MPAA, and it won't work for AP.
One of the AP's arguments against the Drudge Retort was that, in some cases, "the essence of an article can be encapsulated in very few words." If AP articles are that shallow and devoid of content, they aren't worth quoting in the first place.
If the AP doesn't drop this issue and fast, the boycott against them will make the AP an irrelevancy so fast it'll make their lawyers' heads spin.