Something is going to have to be planned. YouTube is very quickly becoming something we won't like.
If the regime had to pay for false-positives then there could be balance. Who has the power to pressure youtube to be better?
In a world where distribution is free and frictionless the only thing to create and manage is scarcity.
For example, how exactly do you catch videos using copyrighted material and deal with disputes when thousands of hours of video are uploaded every hour? Doing this manually is likely infeasible. But algorithms are error-prone, as YouTube exemplifies very well. Or how exactly do you stand up to these massive billion-dollar media companies without going bankrupt during your first court case? Which (I think) is why YouTube currently simply goes along with whatever these companies demand.
Criticizing YouTube is easy. What is hard is coming up with better solutions that could actually be implemented in whatever YouTube could potentially be replaced with.
Anonymous, encrypted, censorship-resistant peer-to-peer networks.
Think torrenting + youtube + blockchain had a baby.
I would argue if they can't responsibly handle it then perhaps they just shouldn't be doing it. They want to have their cake, and eat it too while passing the negative outcomes on to everyone else. Maybe videos shouldn't be public the moment they're uploaded to allow for adequate review, since they clearly have trouble as is. There's a solution.