"can copy and paste the articles"

If that is all the issue is the solution for newspapers is simple. Just disable the function for their website. Usually all it takes is a short javascript insert. There webmasters should know how. And no, its not a cost issue. It just popping some simple code for the webpage with the software will do automatically once set up to do so. And the code has been around since the earliest days of javascript.

Yes, there are work arounds to it, but 99.9% of websurfers are unlikely to have the knowledge of programming to do so, nor want to make the effort. So the issue of cut and paste is solved.

So no, that isn't the issue. That I would have no problem with. The issue is that they want it declared that just posting a URL to an article, along with a title, should be regarded as a copyright violation. Yes, the standard model of references used by MLA and APA to cite your sources.

An early casualty would electronic copies of journals since the MLA/APA citations in them would now be considered copyright violations. Imagine if the full text articles in your electronic data bases are no longer allowed because the journal owners don't want to pay AP for any citations to the news articles in newspapers. Blogs would follow as would most discussion boards like this one.

Sad to say there is also an easy solution to this type of "deep linking" if you feel its a problem. All you need is to include code that re-diirects people following the URL link to the website home page. If its a paysite then you just protect it with a pop-up that requires you to log in. The Wall Street Journal and Spacenews already do this. Again 99.9% of the websurfers wouldn't have the tools to break it, while the very effort to do so would demonstrate intent. Kinda like cracking the code on a HD DVD.

No, the issue I have with AP is they are seeking a legal solution to what is easily solved with web programming tools that have been around since the 1990's. The key is that the programing tools won't allow AP to earn revenue for "copyright violations" as the legal solution will. They are fishing for ways to make more money, not to solve a theft problem. A non-net analogy would be charging you for just looking at headlines on a paper in a news rack as you walk by to increase there revenues. How many newspaper racks do you walk by on the way to work?