Good points, and all easily manageable via a few adjustments to the rule.

If it's cporn or other felony content, then fine, shut it all off.

For anything else, allow download only from the last three IP addresses the owner personally logged in from, plus two (if they've moved or are nomadic), plus maybe the same two or three last logged-in-from MAC addresses. Limit to three successful copies downloaded, then shut off.

Alternatively, if you still think that zero future sharing through their site must be the rule, then at least provide the content on a media copy at a nominal fee such as [cost of media]+ [50% service charge] + postage.

Finding fault is the easiest thing in the world. But if you apply your brain to finding a solution instead of merely a problem, things work better.

The reason felony content is a problem is due to liability issues, but it doesn't only apply to that. The lines aren't always clear, so they would probably err on the side of being overly aggressive to be safe. Can you relax that paranoia legislatively somehow?

Yes, tho it seems that as soon as they are not publishing it, i.e., only holding it for private storage by the single posting party, the only problem is with strict liability content like cpron, which mere possession is a crime?

Additionally, the hosts like Google/YouTube, etc. can say that they have found that the material has potential legal issues, and they will hold it for release when the courts sort it out.

Again, the key here is to have some kind of recourse. Anything less is psycopathic - they make a fair exchange by providing a "free" service in exchange for the users' attention, and then when someone puts in 2/3 of a decade of attention and content-building, to simply cut it off with no recourse is just massive theft or vandalism, at best.

And, if they are not going to provide that, they need to provide at least constant prompts that Damocles' sword is hanging over their heads and they need to make local backups.