No they don't, but they own the images sent out. They are copyrighted. Just like something that appears in a newspaper. However there is the same exemption for quoting copyrighted material that applies right on FR. For purposes of public discussion you can quote excerpts, even if the source objects. You cannot post entire works, if the copyright owner objects.
In this case I'd say that the SwiftVets did the video equivalent of posting excerpts.
As a counter charge all it would take it to find a Soros type 527 ad that uses ABC source material, and ask ABC whey they didn't object to that.
You make a good point about fair use.
I wonder, however, if the "obligation" to provide political information as part of their "use of airwaves" privilege doesn't mean that their political coverage DURING elections shouldn't be the property of the people.
"They are copyrighted. Just like something that appears in a newspaper. However there is the same exemption for quoting copyrighted material that applies right on FR. For purposes of public discussion you can quote excerpts, even if the source objects. You cannot post entire works, if the copyright owner objects."
===
This is something that has always bugged me. I thought once something hit the internet, it was fair game. No one owns the internet. (First use on the internet for me was via a university professor many years ago; unlike Gore who claimed he invented it - LOL) Universities got the ball rolling.
And I STILL believe that it's ALL fair game once posted. That's just me though.