Andy Updegrove writes "How much use is "fair use" when it comes to Web-based content?
That's a question that I expected would receive more attention in the blogosphere when Google announced last month that it had reached a deal with the Associated Press that would permit it to continue to link to AP stories at the Google Website – for a price. As a first proposition, no part of a creative work (whether literary, musical or otherwise) that is large enough to be an identifiable part of that work (as compared to a few words or notes that could randomly appear in many works) becomes protected by copyright at the moment of creation. Unless copyright ownership is voluntarily surrendered, no part of that work may be reproduced without the consent of the copyright owner. Should Google have gone to court to claim that search snippets represent "fair [and therefore free] use"?"