Going out on a limb here, but in the course of announcing your lawsuit, did you mention any of the myriad covid talking points that youtube has been banning for months now?
It might not be a repository of legal filings, but it's certainly not just an entertainment site. Opinion-oriented media, news programs, court footage, press releases, and educational videos have all been intentionally promoted in the past by Youtube.
The issue at hand is that some press releases are being permitted (and even promoted by YT) whereas others are not, despite the fact that there's no particularly notable difference in the authority of those speaking. (Obviously I recognize that this press release in particular more likely than not contains dangerous misinformation, but I still object to the idea that Youtube can unilaterally decide what is and is not dangerous misinformation).
That is a self-refuting statement. If Youtube was just an entertainment site: then they wouldn't be deleting legal content, with apparent public interest, provided to them for free.
You can be an entertainment service and still regulate the content you host. Would you expect Netflix to host this content?
It wasn't? Where can I watch a copy of it then?