Associated Press loves fair use (we just wish they'd share)

Discuss

19 Responses to “Associated Press loves fair use (we just wish they'd share)”

  1. NoahTheDuke says:

    *facepalm* Are they serious? How does that even work? What kind of ridiculous twists do they have to do in their mind to properly balance these actions? It makes no sense, and boggles my mind.

    Stupid. Just stupid.

    Noah

  2. Bloo says:

    Really? Scanning the _entire_ book in to make it searchable for purposes of commentary is legal?

    What if someone at the AP downloaded the scanned text to their flash drive, is that legal – if they say they intend to do research so they can write an article about it for the AP? And then what if their roommate/spouse/friend reads it while it’s there?

    None of this should be construed as a defense of DRM or misguided copyright laws – I’m really trying to ask questions to determine just where fair use would stop in this instance.

  3. nic0mac says:

    I can the understand the viewpoint here about AP using double standards, but I believe that scanning and searching the book electronically is allowed under fair use… as long as only one person had access to the file at once, if they bought 1 book but allowed 10 reports access to the file simultaneously then they would owe the publishers for 9 more copies right?
    Knowing the AP – as soon as they had the book paid for they probably also informed the store of its mistake to prevent other news services from getting a copy then called the publisher and asked for reaction comments about the store selling illegal early releases..

    • IamInnocent says:

      I believe that scanning and searching the book electronically is allowed under fair use… as long as only one person had access to the file at once, if they bought 1 book but allowed 10 reports access to the file simultaneously then they would owe the publishers for 9 more copies right?

      So many contrivances to keep bored people busy…

    • nic0mac says:

      That should be 10 reporters not reports in #3.. Also Cory, does changing the book name to “Glowing Rouge” now make it a parody instead of a quote thus releasing you of the need to pay for any licensing?

  4. Bloo says:

    I don’t think selling the book early is illegal – it might violate a contract they have with the publisher, and therefore might be ‘breach of contract’ I guess. I think, though, that if they don’t want the book to be sold until the Nth day of the month, they shouldn’t have it delivered until the (N-1)th. If the store has it in stock, why not sell it?

  5. nanuq says:

    “Knowing the AP – as soon as they had the book paid for they probably also informed the store of its mistake to prevent other news services from getting a copy then called the publisher and asked for reaction comments about the store selling illegal early releases..”

    Ever the high road…

  6. Anonymous says:

    I would wonder how many people were accessing the electronic version at one time. I will presume the answer will be well each person was looking at a different page.

    Someone should ask the AP if they think 100 people can listen to the same Video/CD at the same in 100 different places just because they have a slight time shift in the audio?

    Can we report this to the British and have the AP’s net access removed?

  7. dculberson says:

    Doing Moog!

  8. IronEdithKidd says:

    So the AP gets to play Kalvinball with copyright law whenever it suits their ends? The hypocrisy is terribly thick this time.

    For the only time ever, I am going to advocate for Caribou Barbie: sue the ever-loving shiznit out of the AP, they have made a pirate copy of your book for their gain. This is not fair use, this is theft.

  9. george57l says:

    Boing Drogue ?

  10. Anonymous says:

    I appreciate the irony here. You’re absolutely right. But there is a big difference between what the AP is doing and what they’re complaining about. Breaking a book apart, scanning it and using it around the office is only going to be read by the reporters on the project. It’s equivalent to time-shifting or format-shifting.

    The AP’s licensing scheme is designed to stop people from reprinting stories and sharing them with everyone on the web. It’s easy to find blogs that cut and paste the meat of good articles without adding much of anything. It isn’t fair for them to earn ad revenue that should really go to the people doing the work.

    So even though both of these actions are gathered under the term “fair use”, they’re really very different actions.

  11. OrcOnTheEndOfMyFork says:

    It’s all fun and Fair Use…

    …until someone copies your work.

    It’s like a Law of the Internet, or something.

  12. foobar says:

    Rouge goes on your face, rogues do it from behind.

  13. Vic333 says:

    Sed-a-give?! I mean, Glowing Rouge?! It’s Going Rogue. I’m not sure which title is dumber, but we should try to get it right.

  14. Jurph says:

    I’m starting to think that Bong-Bong is messing up the name of her book to reduce their future workload – that way, when Red Staters google for reviews, they won’t stumble on this site and fill the comment section with posts that will eventually need to be disemvowelled.

    May I also suggest:
    - Throwing Pogue
    - Boeing Drogue
    - Showing Vogue

  15. Anonymous says:

    Since Ms. Palin is so entrepreneurial at the moment, we just need to convince her that she’d make a lot of money by suing the AP. She already hates the “media”, so a lawsuit should be a win-win for fair use and lolz.

Leave a Reply