Anil Dash makes a fair point over here about content on the new web applications such as flickr.com. What we are seeing with sites like flickr is that the content is generated by users for free for the provider. The site is full of advertising. The owners do not give credit or cash to the users who are making them this fortune.
Is there a point where a good idea just works, then becomes a great site by the user content and interactivity, and then becomes a complete a corporate money machine with no return to investors which in this case would really be the users who submitted their photographs and not Yahoo for purchasing the site.