It doesn't face plant on all four (there are no ads in the distillation so it's informational, original work is reporting of speculated facts, it is 0.6% of the whole, and as news orgs are losing money, this lost less money for NG Media than had I visited the original with my ad blocker). There is a strong case for all four. But it seems closeish to Folsom v Marsh:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folsom_v._Marsh

Anyway, courts have seen more outlandish claims - and gone with them (Oracle v Google), so whatever.