And yesterday I updated my blog post following a comment, in order to clarify that as far as I could see from what the AP had said, it wasn’t DRM in the sense that people normally understand it - which is why I had used quotation marks in the first place.
I’ve now further updated my blog post on Associated Press’s “DRM for news” to refer to an excellent article by Ars Technica which also can’t figure out how on earth hNews can be used to “wrap” and “protect” content in the all-encompassing way that the AP seem to be suggesting.
I.e., it can’t be: “one is struck by the thought that perhaps the AP has been snookered into believing that it's getting "DRM for news," when in reality it's simply using an open-source news metadata markup language with Creative Commons rights expression”!
The article also highlights contradictory statements by different AP officials as to their attitude towards people who copy even part of their content, and links to a wickedly funny graphic that makes fun of the AP scheme (warning: don’t click that link if you are anti swear words!)
©WH. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share-Alike England 2.0 Licence. Please attribute to WH, Tech and Law, and link to the original blog post page. Moral rights asserted.