Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AP to Charge Members to Post Content Online

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the sing-for-your-supper dept.

oboreruhito writes "The Associated Press has announced that, effective Jan. 1 2006, it 'will begin charging newspapers and broadcasters to post its stories, photos and other content online.' The article says online portals that are already subscribed to an online service won't be affected; the change is that newspapers and broadcasters, which have had the privilege of posting online at no extra charge over their usual licensing fees for print or TV, now have to pay extra. How will this affect sites like Google News and Fark?"

5 of 171 comments (clear)

  1. FARK doesn't repost stories... by stonedonkey · · Score: 4, Informative

    It just links to them. Same with Google News. Google posts a blurb, but its length is short enough to avoid copyright infringement (i.e., less than 100 words). The images in Google News link directly back to the domain where the story was posted. Sounds like the AP is asking everyone to prioritize Rueters over them, inadvertently. It also sounds like the AP is starting to recognize the Internet as a very influential source of information. It's not nearly ubiquitous as radio and TV, but it reaches a powerful demographic.

  2. not about linking to content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    This has to do with letting newspapers, etc., use the feeds they get from AP for online press. The newspapers are paying for the premium of having breaking stories delivered in preformatted form so they can get them out with little work. They pay so they can their news on time so their readers can in turn get their news on time through them. All the article is stating is that the AP is instituting a pricing cchange for this service that they have been providing and that it will affect what existing customers are paying.
    Aggregators and bloggers link back to these sites but since they don't pay for an AP feed they have to wait for the news to be posted. Their situation has not changed as a result of AP's policy since they were never customers to begin.

  3. Don't Despair! by ImaLamer · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is always Wikinews, a public domain news source.

    --
    Get your Unix fortune now!
  4. Re:Google and Fark? by nacturation · · Score: 4, Informative
    This is a non-story. These two paragraphs FTA sum it up well:
    About 300 commercial Web sites, including popular destinations such as Yahoo, AOL and MSN, already have been buying AP content, said Jane Seagrave, the news cooperative's director of new media markets.

    But price increases are often a prickly issue for the AP because it's a not-for-profit cooperative that is owned by its customers _ the traditional media that form its membership.
    So it's like the RIAA charging member bands a bit more to allow websites to post sound clips. What's the big deal here? Hundreds of websites already pay to have it online. All this does is end the free ride for traditional print publications to stick it on their site as well.
    --
    Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
  5. Am I confussed? by kryptik_79 · · Score: 2, Informative
    Unless I'm mistaken, this will not effect google and fark... "The article says online portals that are already subscribed to an online service won't be affected"

    Newspapers and broadcasters that currently liscense AP's material for their print/broadcast mediums will now have to pay an additional liscense fee to reproduce it within their online properties.

    I see nothing wrong with this