I've always been confused about how meta news isn't news itself and therefore constitutionally protected. If the denver post (or the AP) posts a picture, and someone republishes that picture as 'news' because they reported it, how is that not journalism in itself. Is all copyrighted material off limits as 'news'? (headline, 'the denver post published this picture today claiming that ... '
My gut would tell me, although I'm not a lawyer, that since reproduction for educational purposes is 'fair use' (which isn't constitutionally protected), shouldn't journalism be similarly protected as fair use?