Yeah, the "as such" was superfluous. And you're correct (if I may put words in your mouth) that the DMCA was drafted for (and by) content owners first, service

Yeah, the "as such" was superfluous. And you're correct (if I may put words in your mouth) that the DMCA was drafted for (and by) content owners first, service providers second, and the public at large a distant third. What I thought, but I now have doubts about, was that because this takedown service that Youtube provides was in addition to compliance with regular DMCA takedown notices it would not be subject to the same rules. "You're intertwining "notice and takedown" with "safe harbor"." The point of the takedown system under the DMCA is that compliance with it guarantees (to some extent) safe harbor so I'm not sure how to separate the two.