> Second, it's clear that YouTube, much like Google, et al. are still attempting to keep their classification as a murky "grey area" where they aren't really pl

> Second, it's clear that YouTube, much like Google, et al. are still attempting to keep their classification as a murky "grey area" where they aren't really platforms, but they aren't really publishers, so they can make tons of money, but not seriously answer to the public either This distinction you and others are trying to draw between "publishers" and "platforms" is a red herring. The Communications Decency Act is very explicit about why this is a red herring: > No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. It does not matter how much curation, promotion, or removal of content Google, Facebook et al. engage in. They will never be held liable for the content their users upload, beyond existing criminal and civil liabilities such as those imposed by the DMCA. By virtue of being a provider of an interactive computer service, they will never be treated as publishers.