Voted for

• I don't know enough about it

I chose the above mainly because I don't really know all the ends and outs of the legislation, but from what I've read, a few things come to mind:

Original creators should have the right to protect their work. If they give up that right, then second hand creators or common use should come into play. This would be for any work the original creator wants to be paid for or not (perhaps they just don't want a photo they took becoming one million flavors of meme).

Once it's in the common use domain, then that's it. Have at it.

The bit about whose liable for the content should depend on who ultimately owns it. If YouTube owns the rights to everything published on its site, then it should ultimately be liable for it. That might not help the original creator, or for that matter, ease censorship, but if YouTube wants to continue to have control over content and, probably as important if not more to them, generate income, than they must have some level of responsibility.

The problem with all of that is, there are folks who will sue, and while everyone involved is more than happy to take the money a video or article might generate, no one wants to suffer the consequence said video or article might create. There are certainly frivolous lawsuits, so things like libel or slander will need to be determined, but that doesn't mean fault and accountability shouldn't exist.

It's said that there needs to be any laws. It's said that people feel like they can just use whatever they see on the internet without getting permission. Just because its pervasive, doesn't make it right. Just like I can go and take the toy the neighbors left out in the street and keep it for myself. It may be in the public domain, and possession might be nine tenths of the law, but that doesn't mean it's right.