It's absurd for the channel to be permanently banned, and all its videos deleted, over this, right? We know it's absurd because it won't happen. But there's tw

It's absurd for the channel to be permanently banned, and all its videos deleted, over this, right? We know it's absurd because it won't happen. But there's two issues at hand. Setting aside that of customer support via profit motive and public scrutiny, banning does not imply deleting. So from where comes YouTube's eagerness to delete videos, the source of all value in the service? Where did the practice of even start? Is it a distinction of forums and wikis (where user contributions enter the commons) from blogs and and social networking (where users "own" the "content" on their pages)? Then it's misfortunate that this is what should remain of YouTube's rise to its monopoly on video hosting. (Of course, the opposite situation is also a factor: banned accounts that cannot be deleted)