Actually, CNN was doing what any other major corporation or concern would do in a such a case, regardless of political inclination; whoever created the GIF used the CNN logo, a violation of trademark rights under the law and CNN is within its right to demand what is basically a "cease and desist" regarding the GIF. This is done all the time, in all kinds of situations, mainly for the protection of trademark rights and to firmly establish the extents of those rights; not actually actively enforcing those rights can lead to a sort of assumption of a form of analogy similar to a "grant of easement" in real estate laws; if you don't scrupulously enforce your rights in all cases, you stand to lose some of the ability to enforce those rights. There is also the issue of the possibility of the creator of the GIF being able to profit in some way from the distribution of the GIF with the CNN trademark attached, or the possibility of as even more egregious use made of the work which may adversely affect CNN. Whoever made the GIF is getting off easy: there has been no material damage done as of now and his potential liability is lessened by his acceptance of the CNN complaint...
<O>
__________________
__________________________________________________ __
|