Check out http://www.drudge.com/news/109024/car-bomb-kills-50-baghdad for example — the content submitted constitutes solely a linked headline and a summary/excerpt. There is an invitation for others to criticize/comment, but that’s basically as close as you get.

When judging what bloggers do on the Retort, I think you have to consider the discussion sparked by the user blog entry. If you looked at a blogger’s entire contribution — original blog post excerpting a news story plus all comments in the discussion — every one makes considerable comment on the story being linked.

It’s an unusual model in blogging, but social news sites often have short blog posts that consist largely of excerpts followed by long discussions.

I did consider that — and I think it plays against the poster. If you can discuss the article by reading simply the snippet (and not the rest of it), have you taken the “heart”? Maybe. Maybe it’s unavoidable because of the factual nature of the underlying content. In any event, it’s colorable.

The other question, of course, is whether the words used in the excerpt is necessary to spark the discussion. Take the first excerpt (the HRC one). What if it said this:

Hillary Clinton suggested that the primary contest could end this week, as superdelegates back one of the two remaining candidates. She told the AP that “after the final primaries, people are going to start making up their minds”, calling it a “natural progression.”

That would probably be fine. The AP holds a copyright on the words they used, but not the ideas that those words express.

So if that would also work — and I think it would — then the use of copyrighted material seems unnecessary. ]]> http://www.centernetworks.com/ap-drudge-copyright-fair-use/comment-page-#comment-18506 Counsel Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 #comment-18506 I agree the "fair use" appears difficult, but I don't know that it is a difficult as others (Copyright holders and lawyers) make it seem. If a blogger uses "snippits" of information from a source (e.g., quotes from those being interviewed, etc.) and only uses those facts rather than the analysis or the way in which the author portrays the situation, the blogger is likely to be okay. Bloggers should be attempting to drive traffic to other sites. Doing so creates networks of information. If the AP saw that a significant amount of traffic was visiting their site that originated at the Drudge, I don't know if they would have sent the letter. The AP (and everyone else) is looking for page views. If you host a popular site and can "drive traffic," you get more leeway than if you are seen as a "traffic sink." 1. Do cite your source; 2. Include only the minimal amount of material from the source in your blog/article/posting; 3. Link to the source in order to drive traffic to the source; 4. Make sure your use of the information does not deprive the source of ... anything--just as you don't want your site to be copied or deprived of visitors... The U.S.A. government states, "Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work." (See http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html). Education is great for everyone. Protecting AP's copyrights may mean they will also protect yours--and maybe even link to your site in a story. What would be better than that? I agree the “fair use” appears difficult, but I don’t know that it is a difficult as others (Copyright holders and lawyers) make it seem.

If a blogger uses “snippits” of information from a source (e.g., quotes from those being interviewed, etc.) and only uses those facts rather than the analysis or the way in which the author portrays the situation, the blogger is likely to be okay.

Bloggers should be attempting to drive traffic to other sites. Doing so creates networks of information. If the AP saw that a significant amount of traffic was visiting their site that originated at the Drudge, I don’t know if they would have sent the letter.

The AP (and everyone else) is looking for page views. If you host a popular site and can “drive traffic,” you get more leeway than if you are seen as a “traffic sink.”

1. Do cite your source;
2. Include only the minimal amount of material from the source in your blog/article/posting;
3. Link to the source in order to drive traffic to the source;
4. Make sure your use of the information does not deprive the source of … anything–just as you don’t want your site to be copied or deprived of visitors…

The U.S.A. government states, “Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work.” (See http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html).

Education is great for everyone. Protecting AP’s copyrights may mean they will also protect yours–and maybe even link to your site in a story. What would be better than that?

“the fair use of a copyrighted work, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.”

Here’s another axiom: when a blogger uses the phrase “[wins] hands down”, the opposite is likely the case.