I think he's for safe harbor. But he's making a critique of the knee-jerk reaction that the blogosphere is having. Censoring YouTube is a blow against free spe

I think he's for safe harbor. But he's making a critique of the knee-jerk reaction that the blogosphere is having. Censoring YouTube is a blow against free speech. Generally we should prefer YouTube to the government here. However the interests of free speech and YouTube are not identical either. They may resist government censorship, but they also censor content for their own purposes. The ideal of free speech, in his view, is not that we have giant private sharing infrastructures (or even competition among them). In his ideal world, there would be common sharing / hosting / backup infrastructure, so distributed and fine grained that it would be simply everywhere.