Viacom v. YouTube
A win for YouTube changes the political climate in Google's favor, meaning new legislation would probably follow public favor, which the lawsuit would promote for the sharing of public domain content. Furthermore, in simple terms, once aired, content is (or damn well ought to be) public domain. So it follows that YouTube's sharing model falls under fair use of such content. The Radio Commission (today's FCC) established two things that matter here. First, that the public owns the airwaves; and 2, that the phone company couldn't possibly be able to monitor (and be accountable for) the content that flowed through its privately owned copper (although it uses public rights of way). This is what I believe is the underpinning of Safe Harbor; that you can't hold a media company accountable for everything its pass through its network. Safe Harbor may only be possible because it permits copyright owners to object to content if it owns it, and subsequently get it removed