AP to Bloggers: Chill Out!

Goliath is telling the army of Davids there is nothing to fear. Oh, really?

June 20, 2008 - by Brian C. Ledbetter

Fret not, fearless blogger: The Associated Press is not coming after you. They have been so busy pursuing a dastardly content thief that they forgot to mention that they weren’t trying to shut down the entire blogging world. This time.

Don’t you feel better already?

Robert Cox, the head of the Media Bloggers Association with which the AP is currently negotiating, has released a statement yesterday outlining his view of how things between the AP and the Drudge Retort transpired. And, while he doesn’t claim to represent the entire blogosphere, his statements are sweeping enough to have raised some extreme ire in parts thereabout. And, when one considers that the MBA is in business with the Associated Press, things become just that much hazier.

According to Robert, this is all a giant misunderstanding, as the Associated Press is taking issue with a long series of abuses — presumably “frequent and systemic” — committed by contributors to the Retort. At issue, Robert says, are cases in which entire AP articles were posted to the website, triggering the AP’s automated copyright-protection system, and sending their crack legal staff rushing down the fire pole, ready to spring into action against the dastardly infraction.

That’s all well and good, and nobody doubts that the Associated Press has every right to protect its collective intellectual property, but the core problem here remains unchanged. Whenever the AP sends a cease-and-desist letter to we, the unfunded rabble, the ripple extends far beyond the individuals involved.

Sure, it’s an isolated case when they send their army of lawyers after the Drudge Retort. Or when they threaten Snapped Shot. But when examined as a whole, the campaign itself presents a most terrifying problem.

You see, bloggers, as a general rule, write what we do as a hobby. We share our thoughts on modern news and events as individual efforts, and are largely uncompensated for our work, because we enjoy doing so, not because we expect a giant payday for our efforts.

As such, most of us do not have a team of lawyers on-hand to respond to legal complaints. No legal counsel ready to send a quick reply. No protection whatsoever against personal financial trouble if the copyright challenge turns into a courtroom battle.

And, as most legal battles are determined and defined by jurisdiction, even if we do get offers for legal help, as I was blessed to receive back in March, in most cases the kind lawyers making such offers aren’t in a position to actually be able to help. Or if they are, it comes at a price which we bloggers can’t afford to pay. For instance, I was offered absolute protection if the AP pursued me further, so long as I paid out a $10,000 retainer — which isn’t exactly all that helpful for a hobbyist, but if things had progressed further, it might have been a tragic necessity.

Sadly, I didn’t hear about the Internet superhero until well after the fact.

Left helpless in the legal jungle, most bloggers in this situation have no recourse other than to fold to the threat, and subsequently live with the dictates mandated by the lawyers above. If you don’t think this has a “chilling effect” (and I do hate quoting liberals) on the blogosphere, you’ve obviously never been the target of one of these campaigns.

That’s okay, though, because according to Mr. Cox, the AP is being strongly encouraged to provide some instructions to we bloggers about how we plebians can use their content.

Oh, really?

You know, if the AP is really serious about offering guidelines to the public over how their content can be used, then who knows? Maybe it’s a good thing, but it’s not like such an outline would be anything new. And, if it goes beyond what’s prescribed by federal Copyright statutes, it may do more harm than good.

Legal blogger Gabriel Malor has, in fact, already offered such an explanation, which I think should be read and memorized by bloggers everywhere. In particular, Gabriel says, “Fair use isn’t, however, carte blanche to take the copyrighted works of others. And it’s not always easy to tell just how much copying fair use will cover.”

Wise advice for everyone. Quotation and properly linked attribution are the lifeblood of the blogosphere, but these principles that have developed over time aren’t legal by any stretch of imagination. Or, more accurately, they aren’t “defined” by statute — which is all that matters to the corporate lawyer-types that send out these types of threats.

Cox claims that his group offers legal protection to bloggers who receive legal threats from news associations. If even remotely true, I would suggest that everyone rush to sign up to become a member of the Association. I fear, however, that this might be nothing but an attempt to capitalize on the fame for personal gain.

After all, when the AP came calling for me, the Media Bloggers Association was nowhere to be found.

But then again, neither was the New York Times.

It’s funny how that works.

Brian Ledbetter writes Snapped Shot, a blog dedicated to critiquing photojournalism amongst other things, and is a part of the small but proud club of people who the Associated Press loves to hate.

Bookmark and Share
Email Print Podcasts Digg PJM Home

Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:

1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.

2. Stay on topic.

3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.

4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.

5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.

The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.

These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.

7 Comments

1. snapped shot · always watching the all-seeing eye:

[...] hear more about the AP’s latest assault on the unwashed rabble that is the blogosphere? Alright, relax already: Fret not, fearless blogger—The Associated Press is not coming after you. They have been so busy [...]

Jun 20, 2008 - 4:36 am 2. Bobby McGill:

Oh… thank god. I have lost a lot of sleep with dreams of AP chasing me down.

Bobby
idlewordship.com

Jun 20, 2008 - 7:57 am 3. Sometimes it boils down to Freedom of the Press…doesn’t it? « Valentine Bonnaire:

[...] 20, 2008 One would ask, in an era of almost complete media control here why they might want this, especially right [...]

Jun 20, 2008 - 10:13 am 4. Debby:

Who needs them anyway…I mean really…I will just boycott..

Jun 20, 2008 - 12:04 pm 5. Bill Enator:

No question that the AP’s making a strategy move .

At AP’s annual meeting they name
iCopyright Named Licensing Agent for Reuse of Associated Press Content Published Online

AP has determined that they consider to be fair-use to be exactly four words. More than that and you pay $12.50 – $100. This is pretty hypocritical considering that AP journalists help themselves routinely to much more than four words from blogs and websites in the name of “fair use”.

AP takes this a step further and under the license pricing and terms of use for iCopyright they place language that liraises eyebrows and limits free speech.. Pretty unusual for an entity that lives and dies by freedom of speech protection.

iCopyright License Excerpt:
Derogatory and Unlawful Uses: You shall not use the Content in any manner or context that will be in any way derogatory to the author, the publication from which the Content came, or any person connected with the creation of the Content or depicted in the Content. You agree not to use the Content in any manner or context that will be in any way derogatory to or damaging to the reputation of Publisher, its licensors, or any person connected with the creation of the Content or referenced in the Content.”

——
I think that any reasonable person would see a strategy in play and is very much at odds with rights they flaunt daily.

AP is large and may not be a monopoly in the strictest sense, perhaps oligopoly or cartel is a better description.

Is the AP behaving ethically and morally? Are they being a good citizen? Many say they’re not.

AP’s strategy and behavior raises lots of questions and concerns:

The Poynter Institute on it’s blog asks: AP v. Bloggers: Hurting Journalism?

Pajama’s Media Asks: Is the Associated Press Good for America?

Perhaps the question we need to ask is: “Is the AP evil?

Jun 20, 2008 - 2:44 pm 6. The Conservative Pulse: Surprise Obama is a flip-floper, and more at The Liberty Preservation Alliance:

[...] AP says the us bloggers have nothing to be concerned about. Don’t you feel better? [Source: Pajamas [...]

Jun 20, 2008 - 7:19 pm 7. Michelle Malkin » Photo of the Day:

[...] and other social networking sites. How come they get to use the AP’s photos but blogs like Brian Ledbetter’s don’t?) [...]

Jun 25, 2008 - 8:58 pm

Write a Comment

Name: (required, displayed)
Email: (required, not publicized)
URL: (optional, displayed)
Comments: