> Well guess what: that isn't the copyright holders problem. If your business model is such that you can't monitor everything, then YOU NEED TO FIX your business model.
This is utter nonsense. One, that's not how the DMCA is set up--this burden is squarely on the copyright holder to identify and issue takedowns.
Two, it shouldn't work the other way. You see, copyright relies upon PERMISSION. So even if I upload a "leaked' video that looks completely pirated to an outsider, if I have permission from the copyright holder, it's legal. Given that the copyright holder is the only one who can reasonably be expected to know who they have and have not given permission to, they are the only reasonable party to do so. If you think this example sounds far-fetched, then you need to go back and read Viacom v. YouTube, because Viacom did exactly this and had to remove "infringing" videos they'd given permission to from the case. Twice. After extensive review by expensive lawyers. If their own lawyers with all that information can't get it right, what hope does a 3rd party have?
That this burden is unreasonable is of no concern to the rest of us--it's simply not our property, so it's unreasonable to expect the rest of the world to manage it for them.