Yesterday, I wrote a blog post about the issues between the Associated Press and the Drudge Retort concerning Fair Use. I also sent out a lot of emails, trying to get a meaningful dialog going to establish best practices around Fair Use by bloggers and other online publishers.

Partly as a result of this, there will be a session Saturday June 28th at Sharing the news: Reaching students, training citizens, being organized by the New England News Forum. There have been some interesting emails about trying to define what Fair Use really should mean for bloggers, how disputes over Fair Use should be approached, and some of the problems with the lack of due process in Digital Millennium Copyright Act Takedown Notices. I look forward to continuing this discussion in Lowell.

Then, today, I saw an article in the Washington Post, AP Says Drudge Retort Excerpt 'Matter' Closed; No Official Policy Announced. It described the results as non-response response following the usual pattern of trying to shut the door after the horses are not only out of the barn but on into the next county

Part of this non-response was:

In addition, the AP has had a constructive exchange of views this week with a number of interested parties in the blogging community about the relationship between news providers and bloggers and that dialogue will continue.

Unfortunately, the AP is not currently planning to join in the dialog in Lowell. Jim Kennedy, vice president and strategy director of the AP, responded to an invitation to speak in Lowell by saying:

Thanks for the invite. I'd love to help, but we won't be in a position to talk about this subject in detail for a little while longer. The latest episode raised some issues that need to be discussed and decided here, and that probably won't happen in the timeframe of the panel.

In the meantime, I can't put us in a position of speaking publicly. Thanks again for thinking of us.

The AP statement quoted in the Washington Post ended on a more hopeful note. The resolution of this matter illustrates that the interests of bloggers can be served while still respecting the intellectual property rights of news providers.

Yes, the interests of bloggers and the interests of other intellectual property right holders can be well served when everyone is willing to sit down and discuss how best to meet everyone’s interests. It is unfortunate that the Associated Press will not be participating in this discussion in Lowell.

Update: Hat Tip to Jay Rosen, for providing the following additional links:

Rogers Cadenhead's comment

Bob Cox's comment

AP's story

Scott Rosenberg's question: prelude to a longer conflict?

and

Scott Rosenberg writing about AP’s nightmare identified