I think you might be taking the definition of "distribution" a little too far. By your definition anyone in the press, anyone that ever wrote a blog or did a podcast or, potentially, any one that quoted them during a forum discussion could possibly be disqualified. Now, if RS was an officially sponsored public relations firm for IDG and/or Lucasfilm then maybe that part of it would apply.
However, I think some of your other arguments still stand. If you work for a company that in some way is an affiliate of those running the contest, you might be out. That would seemingly include web sites that are affiliates, meaning you make money through sales when people click ad banners on your site. I also think OfficialPix would qualify.
But that part about distribution, no. I have my own blog but I don't have advertisement banners or any affiliate links on my site and I don't think I'd be counted out if I quoted their press release and discussed it.
E...
Nice try, but I think he's still pinched. The point that Phil freaked out and closed the thread about this on RS was the point right after which he admitted that RS is (his words) an "affiliate" of starwarsshop.com and that anyone that voted for Dustin by clicking through RS to there, triggered a cash kickback to RS for that vote under the starwarsshop.com affiliate program. So, yeah, affiliate then. That seemed to lock it in for me, and Phil. Because when I called him out after saying that, he deleted the thread and put up what you see there now.
Your blog is safe. But yes, according to the way these rules are written, they DO seem to exclude anyone who is a staff writer on any major site that passes on unedited promotional material for IDG, LFL or any of their affiliates. This even means that technically, Dustin would be disqualified just for promoting RS on TF.N or somesuch, since RS is an "affiliate". These rules are written broadly on purpose to prevent anything like this from happening.
These are THEIR rules. If they wanted it to be different, they could have written them any way they want. But once they publish these rules and run a contest under them, involving the public in purchases based on these rules, they are bound to follow them, or be open to claims of fraud.
As for USCWANNABE, his disqualification (while very interesting as juicy gossip to the rest of us) is protected overtly from disclosure under these rules because they say that IDG reserves the right to disqualify anyone for any violation of the rules or for failing (at IDG's sole discretion) IDG's background check and that all of IDG's decisions are final. So, it would be hard (if not legally nearly impossible) to compell a comment out of IDG on that disqualification.