A better analogy would be that performing yoga is like singing warm up scales/exercises. The scales themselves are not covered copyright but if you record him singing the scales the specific recording would be covered by copyright. I have no problem with someone claiming a copyright over the specific video or audio but there is no way they should be able to claim the scales or process of singing under copyright.
I've been doing some research on this and I cannot find any info linking Trunk Archive and Getty images other than the fact that Getty owns PicScout. PicScout is a service they provide (for fees, of course) but is separate from claiming any ownership to the rights to the images. Has anyone found images at Getty credited to Trunk Archive.
Among my friends and family things are given freely and with no strings. Sometime we will insist on paying it back in full, going dutch or accepting the gift as it was intended... as a gift. As Mike says, download it and enjoy. No strings. If you are a friend/fan/participant then the assumption is that you are part of a community that is growing and giving back in one way or another. It doesn't even ever have to be money. Just participation in the community makes it all richer. How can offering a gift and accepting a gift be amoral?
Regarding your simple question... Mike did not ever and will never have to seek permission for using this image when discussing the actual image as a newsworthy item. Fair use is in effect when discussing the ramifications of the image and it''s copyright status in a news or scholarly environment.
I get the idea of your last comment "Once people realize it, won't that just make them wonder why, and make them more likely to seek out info on Egypt?"... but isn't there a point where the news is so enormous that the repressive government is "better off" blocking the speech then hoping people wont seek it out on their own? In the case of Egypt, the story is so huge that no one could not help but notice it. It's not like people in China are going to only become aware of (and more interested in) these events because the news is being blocked. OK... maybe the blocking will make it more interesting to them but that would be offset by the inability of news getting to the average citizen. Or at least, that is what China is gambling on.
Is really is amazing to see all the harping back and forth and the trashing of the customer/Apple etc. If this was a story about any other computer company I have a feeling the discussion would have stayed (more or less) on topic... "Company Sues Customer for Bad Review". Should anyone really care about the small details here? The real point is whether or not it is a good business practice to sue your customers over reviews. What kind of results are they looking to achieve? Silence him? Chilling effect of others? In my opinion, the Streisand Effect is in full force.