>Youtube doesn't own any of the content on its platform

What additional benefits would ownership grand Youtube? It seems like they have everything worth having (under “License to Youtube, Duration of License, and Right to Monetize”).

https://www.youtube.com/static?gl=US&template=terms

I'm not saying Youtube ought to own it, I'm just contrasting youtube and disney's business models. Youtube doesn't have any equivalent to Mickey Mouse. Mr. Beast may generate tremendous ad revenue for Youtube, but Youtube can't sell Mr. Beast. Youtube is a machine made of steel that you need to operate to generate profit; it is valuable only for what it does. Disney is a machine made of gold that you can operate to generate profit, but which you could also sell for parts to make immense and instant sums of cash; and critically the operation of this golden machine adds more gold to itself, it is valuable for what it is.