Smart choice. What also PO'es me about these fellows is that they protect themselves like heck (nothing wrong with that), whilst leaving the onus entirely on the photographer (everything wrong with this!). If DC finds the use objectionable and sues, the telly fellows will simply point to the 'shooter' who will most likely not have an army of attorneys to counter DC's legal minions–in a nutshell: the photographer is raptus regaliter, whilst the TV people just do like Pilate.
No. The copyright infraction is always to the user, not the photographer. The responsibility is always on the user.
For instance, let's say an advertiser has a video clip from an amateur stage production that he wants to use. He may need several licenses--perhaps stage designer, costume designer, writer, and music composer as well as the videographer--if each of these persons retained his own copyright. None of those copyright holders is responsible for a failure of the user to have gathered all the licenses he needs.