Comments on: Turning the Tables on the Associated Press

By: Idkal » Blog Archive » AP’s Gander Gets Goosed by Blog

Idkal » Blog Archive » AP’s Gander Gets Goosed by Blog — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 13:08:44 +0000

[...] isn’t the first time the Associated Press has been busted for taking content without permission from online [...]

By: Pajamas Media » AP: The Internet’s Big Bully

Pajamas Media » AP: The Internet’s Big Bully — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 16:01:33 +0000

[...] informed me that they didn’t particularly care for me. You can read all about those travails over at Pajamas Media. But in a nutshell, I jumped through every last hoop I could to ensure that their lawyers were [...]

By: james

james — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:36:59 +0000

Empower yourself with knowledge.
1) go to a bookstore and buy a law dictionary
2) look up “fair use” in the law dictionary *
3) note the statutes and keywords referenced there
4) go to law library and look up those statutes in the annotated U.S. Code, and your annotated state code. If you do not know how to do this, ask questions. It is easy to do. Law libraries are extremely well organized. Most major state universities have law libraries accessible to the public. Many county courthouses, state supreme courts, and federal courts have law libraries accessible to the public.
5) Read what the statutes say. Read the case law abstracts in the annotated text. Make copies to take home and study, and ponder, and strategize over.
6) look up related cases to get the details concerning facts, findings, and rulings.
7) if you hit paydirt with one or more of those rulings, “shepardize” those cases to make sure they have not been adversely affected by a more recent case.

* In this case, the internet can substitute for a law dictionary. However, I believe such a dictionary is a valuable reference for any home book shelf.

As I said, empower yourself with knowledge. Reject the “lawyer mystique”. Reject it. Other than reducing ignorance and mortal fear, I do not know where such research will lead.

You may just find recent federal case law with facts closely paralleling your case, a finding that “the critique relies on elements of the photo” followed by a ruling that republishing the photo as part of the critique is protected under fair use. You do not know until you look! Do not take the AP’s word for what the law says. They are the enemy. They seek to manipulate you, and your ignorance gives gives them considerable power. I have just revealed how to research this WITHOUT hiring a lawyer. I have just revealed exactly what a lawyer would do if he/she did not already know the answer, and they likely will not tell you the answer without money changing hands, no matter how friendly and comforting, or authoritative they may sound.

And if you do hit paydirt, you can, at your option, throw the ball back in the AP’s court, again, without hiring a lawyer, and see what they do next. Maybe they won’t do anything, seeing that you have the authority to operate your website as you have. If they want to fight, you now have authority you and/or a lawyer can fight back with, again, at your option. Also, if the authority is clear, you may be able to get attorney fees based on a claim that their action is frivolous and groundless. You do not know until you do the research. I have not done the research because I am not in your shoes. So, at this time, I do not know.

They do NOT truely have all the guns. I am not giving you advice. I am revealing some of how the system works, unveling the “lawyer mystique”, so to speak. This process is very well documented and is not hard for the logical mind to grasp.

One other thing, no matter the nature of the fight, if you chose to fight, do not broadcast your knowledge and strategy to the enemy (ex., on the internet – or anywhere else). Silence is power. Use it. Now, that is advice. But it applies to ANY conflict in ANY venue, not just the legal venue. This advice is very broadly, not narrowly offered. That said, the best response to this comment is; “Thank you”. Say nothing more, or nothing at all.

Good Luck.

By: Valerie

Valerie — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:38:40 +0000

Taking a purportedly unaltered “news” photograph and pointing out inconsistencies is the essence of “fair use.” The critique relies on elements of the photo. These threats are are a form of blackmail obviously intended to stifle the robust debate that is the foundation of our political system.

I should think the ACLU would take this case in a heartbeat. ; )

By: Amy Alkon

Amy Alkon — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:12:43 +0000

Iris, because people do use photos doesn’t mean they aren’t breaking the law or being unethical. Using somebody else’s work (except, say, as a thumbnail to drive people to the original photo for purposes of discussion) without paying for it is called stealing. The fact that many people do it doesn’t change that. I call this “Monkey See/Monkey Do” ethics.

By: Amy Alkon

Amy Alkon — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 14:09:33 +0000

I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t know the exact details of what’s considered “fair use,” but personally, I don’t feel it’s ethical to post photos owned by others, except with permission. If you’re discussing photos, it seems okay to post merely a thumbnail with a link to the photo, but not the photo itself, as this is the fruit of another person’s labor, not your possession. I’m a syndicated columnist, and I don’t let people post my column without paying for it. This is how I earn my living, and if you want to run my column, not simply link to a part of it for discussion, you need to pay me.

By: Irish Cicero

Irish Cicero — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 12:02:58 +0000

Thanks for that. I’m new to this blogging lark and wasn’t sure how much trouble I could get into. There are images all over the internet. Unless someone disables the save function, why shouldn’t they be used?

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 09:12:45 +0000

I completely understand why you would back off in the face of such threats, given your position.

Powerlineblog.com is written by lawyers, so they don’t seem to have much problem with publishing photos.

Wasn’t it only a year ago that TMZ.com was being threatened with lawsuits and now they are on TV?

I’m not a lawyer, but it seems to me that if Michelle Malkin and everyone else on the internet can use photos, you might be able to as well. If you have any “grabable” assets, though, and lack the legal resources to fight the AP, it’s probably better to lay low.

I wonder, though, whether the AP targeted you just because you were publishing their photos or… because you were busting the MSM over their agenda-driven common practice of blithely publishing photos of “dustless” stuffed bunnies carefully posed on top of debris created by a missile.

I also wonder whether maybe you should write to other bloggers who may have received the same AP package that caused you to pull your stuff. If you haven’t reached out to others who are trying to do the work you are doing, then you are probably operating in the dark. And we all instinctively have a fear of the dark.

By: Bill Quick

Bill Quick — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:31:11 +0000

It’s pretty simple. AP has lots of money and lawyers, and so they figure they can get away with whatever they want to do: Shut down impecunious bloggers for “stealing” their IP, then turn around and steal somebody else’s IP. Anything is possible with enough money, clout, and legal representation.

By: JohnMc

JohnMc — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:16:04 +0000

Brian,

You might want to contact the EFF. From time to time they take on cases like yours in the public interest. And I would think your critique of photojournalistic content would fall under the provisions of Fair Use. You differ from Dupree in two critical aspects:

1) The content as utilized by AP by its very posting is now public not private. So long as you continue to critique the photos and not use them for personal gain you should prevail. That is copyright law.

2) You differ from Dupree in that you operate in the public realm with public content. Dupree on the other hand has not relinquished her rights to her property and quite honestly she has not sought being a public figure it was thrust on her.

Contact EFF see if they are interested.