UPDATE: it gets more bizarre:
(citizen journalists can sell images on $5 license, but pro journalists cannot take photos on commercial license!!!):
You are looking at ancient history there from back at the dawn of the 333 era, well before the 107 age arrived.
Journalists can and do record images with a commercial license now days.
The other query all comes from the FAA trying to view everything the same way it does for real planes because that's hwere they come from and what they are comfortable with.
They aren't in the business of deciding who can sell photos or what website you submit photos to.
They don't want to worry about such trivia.
What they are concerned with is aviation safety.
They came to drone flying, trying to make it fit their real plane way of thinking and to them it made sense that for commercial use, you would need a higher standard of training, just like real pilots in real planes do.
The offence they are concerned with is unsafe or unlicenced commercial flying - not photo selling.
It all gets complicated and falls apart when you can quite legally fly and take all the photos you like but to sell those photos later looks to their old fashioned way of thinking, like commercial use.
But if the flying you did last month was 100% legal, can it now be illegal a month later when you sell some photos?
Of course not - and that's why the FAA is trying to get a more realistic system for commercial use with the 107 licenses.
