Comments on: Nevermind http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/06/20/nevermind/ by Jeff Jarvis Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:43:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: AP battle over, copyright war still on » mathewingram.com/work | http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/06/20/nevermind/#comment-377745 AP battle over, copyright war still on » mathewingram.com/work | Fri, 20 Jun 2008 23:11:34 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=3682#comment-377745 [...] bloggers for using brief excerpts, we have nothing but his word on that. As Gabe Rivera notes in a comment at Jeff Jarvis’s blog, the last public statement from the AP on the matter said that even [...] [...] bloggers for using brief excerpts, we have nothing but his word on that. As Gabe Rivera notes in a comment at Jeff Jarvis’s blog, the last public statement from the AP on the matter said that even [...]

]]> By: Rogers Cadenhead http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/06/20/nevermind/#comment-377744 Rogers Cadenhead Fri, 20 Jun 2008 22:38:15 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=3682#comment-377744 The Media Bloggers Association is involved in this because I asked them for help. I am extremely grateful that Robert Cox of the MBA was able to intervene on my behalf and help resolve the dispute. I talk more about the MBA's role in this on my weblog (link above). The Media Bloggers Association is involved in this because I asked them for help. I am extremely grateful that Robert Cox of the MBA was able to intervene on my behalf and help resolve the dispute. I talk more about the MBA’s role in this on my weblog (link above).

]]> By: Bill Enator http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/06/20/nevermind/#comment-377741 Bill Enator Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:21:31 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=3682#comment-377741 Not A Closed Issue and Questions Remain Clearly the AP has a strategy here. At <a href="http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-aps-annual-meeting-icopyright-deal-and-more/" rel="nofollow">AP's annual meeting</a> they name <a href="http://info.icopyright.com/news_041408_ap.asp" rel="nofollow"> iCopyright Named Licensing Agent for Reuse of Associated Press Content Published Online</a> AP has determined that they consider to be fair-use to be exactly four words. <a href="http://license.icopyright.net/user/offer.act?gid=3&inprocess=t&sid=36&tag=3.5721%3Ficx_id%3DD90VCFA01&urs=WEBPAGE&urt=nullit" rel="nofollow">More than that and you pay $12.50 - $100</a>. 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 raises 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 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligopoly" rel="nofollow">oligopoly</a> or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carte" rel="nofollow">cartel</a> 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: <a href="http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=31" rel="nofollow">AP v. Bloggers: Hurting Journalism?</a> Pajama's Media Asks: <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/is-the-ap-good-for-america/" rel="nofollow">Is the Associated Press Good for America?</a> Perhaps the question we need to ask is: "Is the AP <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evil#Evil_in_business" rel="nofollow">evil</a><a>?</a> Not A Closed Issue and Questions Remain

Clearly the AP has a strategy here.

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 raises 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?

]]> By: Rick http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/06/20/nevermind/#comment-377729 Rick Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:50:00 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=3682#comment-377729 I'm somewhat disappointed that you have so far completely ignored the dubious role the MBA has played in all this, basically collaborating with AP to lend credence to AP's claims and de facto supporting AP's strategy of disinformation and intimidation. I’m somewhat disappointed that you have so far completely ignored the dubious role the MBA has played in all this, basically collaborating with AP to lend credence to AP’s claims and de facto supporting AP’s strategy of disinformation and intimidation.

]]> By: Gabe http://www.buzzmachine.com/2008/06/20/nevermind/#comment-377712 Gabe Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:11:17 +0000 http://www.buzzmachine.com/?p=3682#comment-377712 Just to recap, the last clear thing we heard from the AP, as transmitted through the NYT, was that "direct quotations, even short ones" were not appropriate. Just to recap, the last clear thing we heard from the AP, as transmitted through the NYT, was that “direct quotations, even short ones” were not appropriate.

]]>