Careful here. This appears to be referring to the concept of fair use, but firstly there are multiple criteria used to judge fair use (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use#U.S._fair_use_factors), secondly these criteria are (intentionally) subjective and up to a judge's interpretation, and thirdly fair use is US-only.

That seems fine. In the interest of their userbase, companies should aim for the least copyright-damaged user experience possible; this means picking a single country (ideally one with liberal copyright law) and ignoring copyright law in other countries they aren’t based out of. If countries want to force their censorship standards, they can at least be honest about it and block the website (rather than silently deflecting the responsibility of censorship to the website itself).

They brought the heat on themselves when they decided to mock DMCA requests and cease and desists instead of accommodating them.

There's a reason 4chan, Reddit, imgur, Tumblr and its ilk all still exist in the age of copyright. None of them produce their own content-- it's all user submitted, and mostly in violation of some copyright or another.

Generally speaking, my understanding is that hosts aren't liable for user-uploaded content unless they curate or promote it (deletion notwithstanding). That changes their role to that of a content distributor/publisher instead of a mere platform. This is why backpage's CEO got arrested for human trafficking whereas craigslist's did not-- when challenged craigslist shut down its prostitution ads, but Backpage actively reworded and posted them and in doing so became their publisher.

I'm not saying they can't skirt the laws a little bit and get away with it, all I'm saying is they need to have awareness.

Due to the Safe Harbor rules in US copyright laws they don't really need to remove copyrighted content proactively. There's tons of subreddits exclusively dedicated to piracy that they don't care about.