6.17.2008
Is the Associated Press Trying to Destroy Fair Use?
Last year I was interviewed by the Associated Press for a story about Marshall University in West Virginia adding Pagan holidays to its list of excused absences. Since I was proud of being interviewed on the subject, I quoted myself being quoted in my blog.
"By specifically including pagans, Marshall is taking an important step toward recognizing the validity of their beliefs, said Jason Pitzl-Waters, an authority on paganism who edits the Wild Hunt Web site, a blog about religion, politics and culture. 'That's part of the struggle for modern pagans,' said Pitzl-Waters, a pagan. 'Even though modern paganism has been in the public since the 1950s, a lot of people still see it as a rebellious teenage activity, not necessarily something you do as a religious observance' ... 'What binds [modern Pagans] together isn't our theology, necessarily,' Pitzl-Waters said. 'What binds us together is a sense of communal practice and togetherness.'"
I thought that in excerpting the above quote I was protected by the copyright principle of Fair Use.
"The Copyright Act says that "fair use...for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." So if you are commenting on or criticizing an item someone else has posted, you have a fair use right to quote."
But now the Associated Press would want me to pay them $50 in order to quote them quoting me.
"In the name of "defin[ing] clear standards as to how much of its articles and broadcasts bloggers and Web sites can excerpt" the Associated Press is now selling "quotation licenses" that allow bloggers, journallers, and people who forward quotations from articles to co-workers to quote their articles. The licenses start at $12.50 for quotations of 5-25 words. The licensing system exhorts you to snitch on people who publish without paying the blood-money, offering up to $1 million in reward money (they also think that "fair use" -- the right to copy without permission -- means "Contact the owner of the work to be sure you are covered under fair use.")."
Not surprisingly, this new policy has shocked and angered the blogging community, and the AP is now sitting down with the Media Bloggers Association in order to negotiate some guidelines. However, any deal struck may well fly in the face of our already established rights and freedoms as journalists.
"I suggest it’s better described as yet another attempt by a big media company to replace the established legal and social order with with a system of private law (the very definition of the word “privilege”) in which a few private organizations get to dictate to the rest of society what the rules will be."
I personally think this payment scam is a horrible idea by the AP which flies in the face of established copyright law. Even worse, if you do pay them, you aren't allowed to criticize AP reporting!
"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 […]"
If I followed their new rules, I would be restrained from saying anything "derogatory", and you know who gets to decide what's derogatory don't you? This whole thing is a farce, and until I am directly threatened with legal action I will take no action to change my established quoting and blogging methods. I can only hope that the backlash will make the AP realize that they don't get to tell the rest of us how to apply copyright law.
Labels: AP, blogging, copyright, fair use, free speech, journalism
