[chris37879]

No, that’s just how they’ve chosen to handle them to keep their unofficial “safe harbor” status since net neutrality is dead.

[2OEH8eoCRo0]

Safe harbor is officially part of DMCA though where if you are notified of infringing content and take it down you aren't liable right?

https://www.eff.org/issues/dmca

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_A...

> DMCA Title II, the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act ("OCILLA"), creates a safe harbor for online service providers (OSPs, including ISPs) against copyright infringement liability, provided they meet specific requirements.

[wtallis]

The notice [0] says "Kind of Work: Unspecified" and "Original URLs: No copyrighted URLs were submitted" so the safe harbor provisions pertaining to copyright infringement aren't really applicable here.

[0] https://lumendatabase.org/notices/34149383

[kelnos]

Safe harbor has nothing to do with net neutrality. Not complying with DMCA takedown notices would leave them open to legal liability, which I think is fair for them not to want to do.