AP Shuts Down Blog

What a revolting development. As if SnappedShot cut into their profits.

Comments

[BobInStamford]

What a tragedy. The evil-doers win again.

[Snooper]

communist rat bastards don't like being exposed...the AP is comprised of communist rat bastards...I hope the site is reinstated soon

[Ralph]

I wish it wouldn't have happened but, AP does have a point. It's their stuff. If SnappedShot wants it they can pay for it. If you all want SnappedShot you can donate.

I say this because I've been thinking. The left is more active than we are. How can the sierra club stop all oil drilling here? How can special interests stop all big projects in America? We have become moribund. Nothing big can be done any longer. How? Why? Easy. The left is motivated. They give their special interests money. We don't. Simple as that. We need to start. Pony up people. Put your money where your mouth is.

[Quilly Mammoth]

Ralph,
So when Snap Shot posts pictures of al-AP's traitorous fauxtography as criticism he should pay for them for it?

Glad you weren't around when the Founders were debating that Free Speech thingy!

[Mountain Gal]

Ralph --

You need to do your homework.

The "Fair Use" exception to copyright law allows limited amounts of material to be used in educational or commentary.

For example (I'll just make something up, okay?) Let's say someone distributes through a news service pictures of Beirut after being bombed by Israel. But to make the POINT that Israel has BOMBED Beirut and how terrible that is, the photographer -- or maybe an editor -- fiddles with the smoke in the picture with his Photoshop(c) program to make it look really terrible so no one can miss the point. And the photo is published as REAL evidence of the horrible bombing.

If someone took issue with this photograph and detected that there was an excellent possibility that the photo had been doctored, but was marketed and promoted as being an accurate depiction of the event, how might tht someone provide the evidence to the public that this was in fact not an accurate photo?

Since these are visual objects, one has to use --- photos. One might present the photo with the smoke, and with the electronically added smoke removed.

Not only is that a "fair use" (from a non legal person in the street reading the law -- I'd say that was fair use) it would be FAIR to the public to expose the fraud. Put me on the jury.

Now I don't know what particular photos the AP had in mind with Mr. SnappedShot, but if the AP is reading this, you ought to know guys, you're on the Rather-NYT list for sure now. Except for Ralph (who appears to be not have read the law)you are spitting in the wind.

(Full Disclosure: I have been known to use photos and other copyrighted material when I teach.)