Are you in disagreement with the ruling?
It’s a grey area.
Rebroadcast an NFL highlight and the league is all over you like white on rice. We here at FR use quotes and copy parts of copyrighted material all the time, so I think a lot depends on who is using what, and whether they are benefiting from it financially is key also.
In this case though I think this judge would have sided with the defense considering who the plaintiff was if she had even the tiniest bit of ambiguity.
Perhaps another judge would have decided differently, I can’t rule out a little prejudice from this lady at all.
As far as this site is concerned though it would set a nice precedence for our use of broadcasts to refute statements.
That begs a question, if we are having a Freepathon and asking for donations on the page along with a copyrighted posted material does that open the site up for the monetary benefit laws on fair use?