<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: More on the settlement: AP&#8217;s nightmare identified</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/</link>
	<description>Technology, politics, culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:43:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Blogging Insurance &#38; Quoting the Associated Press &#124; Electric Car Auctions</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-9262</link>
		<dc:creator>Blogging Insurance &#38; Quoting the Associated Press &#124; Electric Car Auctions</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:14:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-9262</guid>
		<description>[...] Scott Rosenberg puts it differently The trouble is that fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use. A Digg home page with lots of AP stories? Well, on the one hand Digg is a business that conceivably is taking business value from AP; on the other hand, Digg users rate and discuss stories, so they’re adding them. And AP accounts for only a little bit of Digg’s total volume of stories. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Scott Rosenberg puts it differently The trouble is that fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use. A Digg home page with lots of AP stories? Well, on the one hand Digg is a business that conceivably is taking business value from AP; on the other hand, Digg users rate and discuss stories, so they’re adding them. And AP accounts for only a little bit of Digg’s total volume of stories. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blogging Insurance &#38; Quoting the Associated Press &#124; Electric Car Auctions</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-9263</link>
		<dc:creator>Blogging Insurance &#38; Quoting the Associated Press &#124; Electric Car Auctions</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:14:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-9263</guid>
		<description>[...] Scott Rosenberg puts it differently The trouble is that fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use. A Digg home page with lots of AP stories? Well, on the one hand Digg is a business that conceivably is taking business value from AP; on the other hand, Digg users rate and discuss stories, so they’re adding them. And AP accounts for only a little bit of Digg’s total volume of stories. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Scott Rosenberg puts it differently The trouble is that fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use. A Digg home page with lots of AP stories? Well, on the one hand Digg is a business that conceivably is taking business value from AP; on the other hand, Digg users rate and discuss stories, so they’re adding them. And AP accounts for only a little bit of Digg’s total volume of stories. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blogging Insurance &#38; Quoting the Associated Press &#124; Home Business Work Online</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-4628</link>
		<dc:creator>Blogging Insurance &#38; Quoting the Associated Press &#124; Home Business Work Online</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 11:33:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-4628</guid>
		<description>[...] Scott Rosenberg puts it differently The trouble is that fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use. A Digg home page with lots of AP stories? Well, on the one hand Digg is a business that conceivably is taking business value from AP; on the other hand, Digg users rate and discuss stories, so they’re adding them. And AP accounts for only a little bit of Digg’s total volume of stories. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Scott Rosenberg puts it differently The trouble is that fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use. A Digg home page with lots of AP stories? Well, on the one hand Digg is a business that conceivably is taking business value from AP; on the other hand, Digg users rate and discuss stories, so they’re adding them. And AP accounts for only a little bit of Digg’s total volume of stories. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: &#160; links for 2008-06-24&#160;&#8212;&#160;contentious.com</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-3456</link>
		<dc:creator>&#160; links for 2008-06-24&#160;&#8212;&#160;contentious.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:31:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-3456</guid>
		<description>[...] Scott Rosenberg’s Wordyard » Blog Archive » More on the settlement: AP’s nightmare identified &#8220;Fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use.&#8221; (tags: copyright fair+use law news+biz media media+evolution social+media tidbits+fodder) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Scott Rosenberg’s Wordyard » Blog Archive » More on the settlement: AP’s nightmare identified &#8220;Fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use.&#8221; (tags: copyright fair+use law news+biz media media+evolution social+media tidbits+fodder) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brusselsblogger</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-3419</link>
		<dc:creator>Brusselsblogger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 11:13:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-3419</guid>
		<description>I do agree with Eric that making a site that is re-posting links to AP&#039;s story isn&#039;t much of value. Everyone who is interested in a &quot;news roundup&quot; can go to Google News or Yahoo News which have licenced the content streams from AP. You can only make a site successful if you are adding value that you cannot get somewhere else, and then it will be more difficult for AP to say that such a site is simply &quot;stealing&quot; their content.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do agree with Eric that making a site that is re-posting links to AP&#8217;s story isn&#8217;t much of value. Everyone who is interested in a &#8220;news roundup&#8221; can go to Google News or Yahoo News which have licenced the content streams from AP. You can only make a site successful if you are adding value that you cannot get somewhere else, and then it will be more difficult for AP to say that such a site is simply &#8220;stealing&#8221; their content.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blogging Insurance &#38; Quoting the Associated Press &#124; Andy Beard - Niche Marketing</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-3401</link>
		<dc:creator>Blogging Insurance &#38; Quoting the Associated Press &#124; Andy Beard - Niche Marketing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 12:10:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-3401</guid>
		<description>[...] Scott Rosenberg puts it differently The trouble is that fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use. A Digg home page with lots of AP stories? Well, on the one hand Digg is a business that conceivably is taking business value from AP; on the other hand, Digg users rate and discuss stories, so they’re adding them. And AP accounts for only a little bit of Digg’s total volume of stories. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Scott Rosenberg puts it differently The trouble is that fair use law does not, apparently by intention, draw a simple line. It sets up a bunch of criteria that you have to weigh. And so the nightmare reposted-feed site is almost certainly not a fair use. A Digg home page with lots of AP stories? Well, on the one hand Digg is a business that conceivably is taking business value from AP; on the other hand, Digg users rate and discuss stories, so they’re adding them. And AP accounts for only a little bit of Digg’s total volume of stories. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chiropetra</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-3393</link>
		<dc:creator>Chiropetra</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 03:59:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-3393</guid>
		<description>Eric Wrote:
&lt;i&gt;That sounds to me a whole lot more like a splog than something that anybody would find useful.&lt;/i&gt;

Actually Eric it&#039;s extremely useful. It&#039;s called a &quot;news digest&quot; and it&#039;s a basic tool for editors, not to mention the source of most of the &quot;news roundups&quot; you find in your local paper.

However I think the real answer is that a page full of headlines and first paragraphs would, as has been pointed out, not be fair use. A single headline or lead in a blog post almost certainly is fair use, much as the AP hates the idea.

I also think Scott has nailed the basic dynamic: A combination of newspaper editors afraid of the web and a sclerotic organization that can&#039;t get its head into the 21st century. So they cry havoc and unleash the lawyers of war.

The bloggers will survive nicely, thank you. But I&#039;m not so sure about the AP.

Pity. My second job in journalism was as a reporter/editor for the AP and I remember most of that time fondly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eric Wrote:<br />
<i>That sounds to me a whole lot more like a splog than something that anybody would find useful.</i></p>
<p>Actually Eric it&#8217;s extremely useful. It&#8217;s called a &#8220;news digest&#8221; and it&#8217;s a basic tool for editors, not to mention the source of most of the &#8220;news roundups&#8221; you find in your local paper.</p>
<p>However I think the real answer is that a page full of headlines and first paragraphs would, as has been pointed out, not be fair use. A single headline or lead in a blog post almost certainly is fair use, much as the AP hates the idea.</p>
<p>I also think Scott has nailed the basic dynamic: A combination of newspaper editors afraid of the web and a sclerotic organization that can&#8217;t get its head into the 21st century. So they cry havoc and unleash the lawyers of war.</p>
<p>The bloggers will survive nicely, thank you. But I&#8217;m not so sure about the AP.</p>
<p>Pity. My second job in journalism was as a reporter/editor for the AP and I remember most of that time fondly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: links for 2008-06-21 (Jarrett House North)</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-3392</link>
		<dc:creator>links for 2008-06-21 (Jarrett House North)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 02:37:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-3392</guid>
		<description>[...] More on the settlement: AP’s nightmare identified (Scott Rosenberg) The AP was trying to draw a conservative line in the sand about linking and reuse to prevent wholesale linkblogs from profiting on its content. Nice goal, wrong approach. (tags: blogging ap) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] More on the settlement: AP’s nightmare identified (Scott Rosenberg) The AP was trying to draw a conservative line in the sand about linking and reuse to prevent wholesale linkblogs from profiting on its content. Nice goal, wrong approach. (tags: blogging ap) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erik Marcus</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-3389</link>
		<dc:creator>Erik Marcus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2008 22:10:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-3389</guid>
		<description>Scott wrote:

&lt;em&gt;Here is AP’s fear: if they say that doing this once is OK, then, well, doing it twice is probably OK, and you’re rolling down a slippery slope to their nightmare, which is someone creating a whole site based on a reposted feed of AP’s heds and lead paragraphs.&lt;/em&gt;

That sounds to me a whole lot more like a splog than something that anybody would find useful.  And I suppose that every blogger has some of their text scraped for use in splogs.  It&#039;s annoying, but I doubt that either bloggers or the AP is going to lose money over this sort of thing.  So if this is really the AP&#039;s big fear, I think it&#039;s misplaced.  It&#039;s an annoyance, not a threat.

-Erik</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scott wrote:</p>
<p><em>Here is AP’s fear: if they say that doing this once is OK, then, well, doing it twice is probably OK, and you’re rolling down a slippery slope to their nightmare, which is someone creating a whole site based on a reposted feed of AP’s heds and lead paragraphs.</em></p>
<p>That sounds to me a whole lot more like a splog than something that anybody would find useful.  And I suppose that every blogger has some of their text scraped for use in splogs.  It&#8217;s annoying, but I doubt that either bloggers or the AP is going to lose money over this sort of thing.  So if this is really the AP&#8217;s big fear, I think it&#8217;s misplaced.  It&#8217;s an annoyance, not a threat.</p>
<p>-Erik</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Furrier</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2008/06/20/ap-nightmare-identified/comment-page-1/#comment-3388</link>
		<dc:creator>John Furrier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2008 22:04:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=1568#comment-3388</guid>
		<description>Great post.  Their dream business model is over.  Social networks see no value in their position.  They should spend their effort on reengineering for social networks not fighting them.

Can&#039;t fight the revolution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post.  Their dream business model is over.  Social networks see no value in their position.  They should spend their effort on reengineering for social networks not fighting them.</p>
<p>Can&#8217;t fight the revolution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
