I'm in the same confused boat. It sounds like they've tried to create freenet in the open web, but I don't see how it works. So, someone can host a playlist server so they're hosting the content - but in order for it to appear on Frizbee.co, Frizbee.co itself would have to link to it in some way, and that's where all the problems arise; linking to infringing content. When people were posting jailbait content, they weren't hosted on Voat or Reddit, they were by and large hosted on Imgur, but the problem was linking to that content. The same is the case here, the person hosting the playlist server isn't actually hosting any infringing content, but links to infringing content, and all made available via Frizbee.co, who will ultimately be the one to come under legal attack because they provide access to the playlist. Regardless of whether a third party hosts the subreddit/subverse/playlist, the owner of the central system or domain, like Voat.co or Frizbee.co in this case, is still going to have legal trouble for simply linking to the content.   If you ever want a truly free speech place to work, you either have to go Freenet, or you have to find an owner prepared to go full-Hotwheels, and with that, one that accepts the monetary setbacks. He can't get any payment platforms to approve him and all his donations have to come through bitcoin at this point, but that crazy fucker actually does host the content himself, he doesn't just provide links to it, and some of it skirts the border of legality. Brass balls. Hopefully Frizbee comes out with a more in-depth overview of how their system works, and how they plan on dealing with actual illegal content.