[caycep]

that being said, I think there is probably legal precedent in holding Youtube accountable to the public interest given its breadth and depth. Looking at the typical 1st amendment litmus test re: falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater - even if that theater is private, what is yelled inside becomes public interest if it affects the public welfare.

[malnourish]

It's a popular myth that yelling "fire" in a theater is unlawful.

For speech to be unlawful it must incite violence:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time...

http://civil-liberties.yoexpert.com/civil-liberties-general/...

[lostlogin]

Being trampled to death is fairly violent. I wonder how non-intential violence would be viewed by a court.

[smogcutter]

Even the incitement or "fighting words" doctrine is limited to specific face to face threats: https://popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-cens...