> after you swear to them that it's not copyright infringement. But it's not very clear how much evidence they should request. Should they? I thought the whole

> after you swear to them that it's not copyright infringement. But it's not very clear how much evidence they should request. Should they? I thought the whole point of DMCA Safe Harbor is that third parties (such as providers and hosting services) don't have to figure out what's infringing and what's not but merely accept statements from all the involved parties. If removal on notice is one-click process, restoring on counter-notice could (should!) also be an one-click process. And if DMCA doesn't prohibit proactive counter-notices, marketplaces that care about their sellers should let them preemptively swear that all their products are not infringing on anything, and save the counter-notice, so takedown requests would be immediately served with "we took the content down for a femtosecond (as legally required), but we got this counter-notice, so we restored the content - now you can go to a court". Not sure how legal this could be, but giants like Etsy's or Amazon's legal teams surely can test those waters if they would want to stop the DMCA abuse.