Can you copyright Web 2.0?

This is a good one.

There was a lot of speculation over copyright infringement at YouTube before Google took over the reins. Now it's gaining momentum and all the copyright lawyers have started dusting their suits off.

As it turns out, YouTube doesn't carry a direct responsibility for the content that appears on its site. They even say so on their guidlines page. I read a post by Mark Cuban over at CNet.

Basically, while it was starting up, no-body cared. Now it's a suit-wearing mega-site with the keys to millions of amateur/pro videos, it's washing its hands of all and any responsibility to the people that made it what it is.

Napster took us there a few years back and they were shut down with aggression. I don't see how YouTube can "host" copyright material and not be hung, drawn and quartered as Shawn Fanning was.

The safe alternative is Revver. But until I read Mark's mail this morning, I will admit this site had passed beneath the radar, which gives you some idea to its viral limitations over YouTube's.

I am wondering if the same applies to blog content. If you host a site which uses and/or refers to material written by others, and you give credits, links and all the rest, are you promoting them, or ripping them off?

In social networks, we are all footholds for each other. If I'm not allowed to use yours, do we both slip?