I ran across a post from Richard Posner, which includes a truly ridiculous "solution" to the decline of newspapers:

Expanding copyright law to bar online access to copyrighted materials without the copyright holder's consent, or to bar linking to or paraphrasing copyrighted materials without the copyright holder's consent, might be necessary to keep free riding on content financed by online newspapers from so impairing the incentive to create costly news-gathering operations that news services like Reuters and the Associated Press would become the only professional, nongovernmental sources of news and opinion.

Jeff Jarvis attacks this conclusion, but there's a far simpler line of attack on it than he uses: it won't work. Who is going to police the millions of websites on a minute by minute basis to ensure that uncompensated linking isn't happening? How is this going to work with a site that's hosted in another country? Has Posner given even a nanoseconds thought to those issues? I doubt it. He's stuck in a print mindset, where copying is onerous enough that it's fairly easy to spot and shutdown. Unless he's thinking of creating a US version of the "great firewall of China", I fail to see how his idea is even vaguely feasible.