AP Files 7 DMCA Takedowns Against Drudge Retort

mytrip points out a blog posting by Rogers Cadenhead, author of the Drudge Retort blog, who says: "I'm currently engaged in a legal disagreement with the Associated Press, which claims that Drudge Retort users linking to its stories are violating its copyright and committing 'hot news' misappropriation under New York state law." An AP attorney filed six Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown requests this week demanding the removal of blog entries and another for a user comment. The AP material they object to consists of snippets of from 33 to 79 words. Cadenhead claims his lawyer believes that all fall squarely within the province of fair use.

Comments

Re:My first suggestion

[wizardforce]

An AP attorney filed six Digital Millennium Copyright Act takedown requests this week demanding the removal of blog entries and another for a user comment.

six for blog entries plus one more making seven.

The AP Has Retracted Its Complaint

[Doc Ruby]

Under heavy criticism from people who actually know how the Internet works, the AP has retracted its DMCA complaints:

Last week, The A.P. took an unusually strict position against quotation of its work, sending a letter to the Drudge Retort asking it to remove seven items that contained quotations from A.P. articles ranging from 39 to 79 words.

On Saturday, The A.P. retreated. Jim Kennedy, vice president and strategy director of The A.P., said in an interview that the news organization had decided that its letter to the Drudge Retort was "heavy-handed" and that The A.P. was going to rethink its policies toward bloggers.

The quick about-face came, he said, because a number of well-known bloggers started criticizing its policy, claiming it would undercut the active discussion of the news that rages on sites, big and small, across the Internet [...]

But the AP still doesn't really get it (if it can get away with destroying it, where "it" is "fair use"):

Still, Mr. Kennedy said that the organization has not withdrawn its request that Drudge Retort remove the seven items. And he said that he still believes that it is more appropriate for blogs to use short summaries of A.P. articles rather than direct quotations, even short ones.

"Cutting and pasting a lot of content into a blog is not what we want to see," he said. "It is more consistent with the spirit of the Internet to link to content so people can read the whole thing in context."

Re:Washington Post bans the AP

[socsoc]

Although TechCrunch stories do appear on Washington Post, they are not the same and it's just content sharing. http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/080508/0395131.html

Re:It really doesn't matter....

[Anonymous Coward]

Drudge Report This is not the Drudge Report. This is the Drudge *Retort*, a website that typosquats the real Drudge Report URL.

This is simply an attempt to quash competition using the DMCA. A government tool provided for their friends to squash anyone that might dissent. This would never have happened if the Drudge "Retort" linked to the AP story like the real Drudge Report does.

(The rest of the comment, which panders to emotion and has no real substance or evidence) 'Nuff said.

DUPE

[Anonymous Coward]

AP Targets Blog Excerpts With DMCA Notices

Re:It is not Fair Use:

[raehl]

"The news" and a particular presentation of the news are not the same thing. 30-80 words is enough to be a particular presentation.

Whether quoting that much is fair use or not is going to depend on a lot more than just the words quoted themselves. Is the quoting commercial? Done for rebuttal purposes? Source-cited? How much of the total work is the quote?

These are factors that may not be easy to clearly decide except at trial.

Disclaimer: I have not seen the 7 cases cited in this story, so for all I know they could be clearly fair use, clearly not, or up for debate.

Re:Wow...

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly, "drugereTORT" ripped off the drudgereport and is now profiting from content created by AP. Now, if the site didn't sell advertising, that may be different. However, just a view of the site looks like the person not only profits from the similar look and domain of Matt Drudge, but also has raised the ire of the AP, who has been fairly lenient toward contest use by bloggers in my experience as a blogger.

This is not the typical case. This guy is a rip-off. Kudos to the AP for going after him and taking the heat.

Re:what is the deal with "drudge retort"?

[julesh]

The first time I wanted to visit this Drudge site I'd heard about, I punched in the obvious url and ended up at the "retort" instead. Isn't that some kind of copyright violation?

Err... no. Titles are not protected by copyright. URLs are not protected by copyright. Single words are not protected by copyright.

Re:Fair?

[Weedlekin]

Fair use is (1) a legal defence in a copyright violation case, not a right; so (b) whether a snippet counts as infringement is therefore up to a judge (and possibly a jury) rather than being a hard and fast rule.

I've met Jim Kennedy

[Spinlock_1977]

I worked for the AP from 2001 thru 2004 as a software engineer. I met Jim Kennedy at that time, who recently said this:

"It is more consistent with the spirit of the Internet to link to content so people can read the whole thing in context."

Believe me, this guy doesn't know the tubey thing from a hole in the ground. To see him preach on the 'spirit of the Internet' is preposterous. He doesn't get it, his colleagues don't get it, and really, there are few left there to get it (trust me, most of the 'good' software engineers have long since fled the AP).

It's sad to say, but what used to be the world's voice of freedom has devolved into back-biting, politicking disaster with a hemorrhaging business model.