My recollection is that the recipient of the claim could also voluntarily waive DMCA immunity over that specific claim by consciously deciding not to honor it. I don't know how to substantiate that recollection, though, and even if that's right, it would definitely be a heightened risk for the service provider to choose to take on.
> My recollection is that the recipient of the claim could also voluntarily waive DMCA immunity over that specific claim by consciously deciding not to honor it.
This is another way of saying if you don't follow the DMCA you become liable for the infringing content (if the content owner sues and is successful, of course), which is indeed what the DMCA says :)
But another intuition or worry people might have is that they will completely lose the safe harbor for all of their activities if they refuse to honor any takedown. I can see why people would have that fear, but I don't think it's right.
there's a fair amount of ambiguity because they're talking about the ability to qualify for safe harbors in general, presumably mixed together with the ability to qualify in a specific case, without drawing that distinction explicitly.
