The real question cleverly ignored by these rights-maximalists is
"Is the ISP/provider responsible for the content posted by others."
As we know, absent *ACTUAL INDUCEMENT TO INFRINGE*
the answer is no. There is no secondary liability to ISPs nor
reponsibility as per the CDA sec 230.
Now if the ISPs *ACTUALLY INDUCE* (see Napster and possibly Mega,
or so USDOJ says), then there is a POSSIBLE liability.
THAT's the only thing providers need to fear, but instead they knee-jerk
take down material.
Note that the DMCA notice is not "DMCA Takedown notice" but rather
"Notice of ***CLAIMED INFRINGEMENT***" (emphasis mine).
A "safe harbor" doesn't mean that a LACK OF A SAFE HARBOR means
instant guilt/civil liability. That is a fact lost on most knee-jerk ISPs.
ISPs should pull up their big-boy shorts and quit taking it in the pants
from every email-script that tells them to take down content because DMCA.
my script verifies that this is true under oath and here's my script-copied
pgp signature because dmca.