tangor - 8:04 pm on May 1, 2010 (gmt 0)
Strawman arguments are, most times, amusing. What we have in the OP is a report that real legal issues (and somewhere down the line) some serious cash for lawyers and possible monetary judgments will be involved.
The youtube users ticked off with viacom may have granted youtube permission to display their work (and some might even be approached by youtube "Hey, everybody likes it! Can we run some ads and slip you a little cash?") but the creator did NOT grant viacom that same permission. There remains a copyright and the creator's distribution channel is youtube.
That's the question that is being dealt with. All this other stuff has just been interesting philosophical discourse.