This has been making the rounds: the "Terms of Service" for "licensing" AP content (remember, they want you to buy a "license" if you quote more than four words). Entertainingly, the AP claims the right to "revoke" the license if you criticize the AP in any way after quoting them, which means if you think they botched a story, you're not allowed to prove it by using quotes from that story. This is what is known as "transparency."
As is usual in such cases, though, the devil is in the details, and while I know this is kind of boring legalese, it repays close attention to detail. And, you know, there are two sides to everything, so let's be fair. Here's the specific language from the AP Terms of Service that has caused such controversy.
You shall not use the Content in any manner or context that will be in any way derogatory to the author, the publication from which the Content came, or any person connected with the creation of the Content or depicted in the Content. You agree not to use the Content in any manner or context that will be in any way derogatory to or damaging to the reputation of Publisher, its licensors, or any person connected with the creation of the Content or referenced in the Content. You shall not use the Licensed Content for any unlawful purpose, and You shall comply with all laws and regulations. Without limiting the foregoing, You represent and warrant that the Content will not be utilized in association with gambling or the distribution, promotion or sale of pornographic, racial or political Content, propaganda or product. When not in use, Happy Fun Content should be returned to its special container and kept under refrigeration. Failure to do so relieves the creators of Happy Fun Content, the Associated Press, of any and all liability. Do not taunt Happy Fun Content. Ingredients of Happy Fun Content include an unknown glowing substance which fell to Earth, presumably from outer space.
It actually sounds sort of reasonable once you see it all spelled out in black and white like that.