I think a better example would be an art show. Say someone starts an art show that lets anyone display their work inside. It's a huge art show with tens of th

I think a better example would be an art show. Say someone starts an art show that lets anyone display their work inside. It's a huge art show with tens of thousands of persons setting up their pieces over acres of land. Is the proprietor of the space responsible for picking through the inordinate amount of material brought in, checking that all pieces are owned by the person entering and that none are copies or otherwise unworthy of showing? Is it enough that they kick out artists when they receive reports of ill doing? Youtube is not a pub selling beer. They are a virtual location that allows any artist to hang their work. They benefit by selling space for advertisements around the booths. When notified of an artist showing an illegal or otherwise unacceptable piece, they remove it. I see this as a perfectly reasonable situation. The metaphor used in interacting with websites is that of a place. I think the metaphor is a good one. Hosting a space for other people to use should not make one de facto guilty if others abuse it. One could argue for negligence if they had no reporting system or ignored it. But so far as I have read, this is not the case.