So AP wants to charge bloggers for "fair use" content. Good luck with that. Many are going to boycott them as a result, but one notable blogger is taking another tack.
Lots of blogs are calling for boycotts of AP content. Not me. I’m going to keep using it. I will copy and paste as many words as I feel necessary to make my points and that I feel are within bounds of copyright law (and remember, I’ve got a JD and specialized in media law, so I know the rules pretty well). And I will keep doing so if I get an AP takedown notice (which I will make a big public show of ignoring). And then, either the AP — an organization famous for taking its members work without credit — will either back down and shut the hell up, or we’ll have a judge resolve the easiest question of law in the history of copyright jurisprudence.
The AP doesn’t get to negotiate copyright law. But now, perhaps, they’ll threaten someone who can afford to fight back, instead of cowardly going after small bloggers.
Which brings up a good point. Drudge Retort isn’t doing anything that Boing Boing or Digg or the Huffington Post or any other mega site isn’t doing. So why pick on some little guy who can’t afford to defend itself, for such a truly minor infraction? It was complete bully tactics.
I still can’t wrap my head around the idea of charging someone to link to you. We’ve been witness to some staggeringly stupid acts on the internet, but this one really takes the cake.
Do they understand that if they sue Markos, he’ll get all the traffic he can eat? Do they even understand the whole concept of traffic?