I'm saying it should be measured to see, before proposing changes. I'd love to learn that a majority of DMCA notices are individual artists taking down legitimate infringement. Somehow I highly doubt that's the case.

I'm more idealistic about some things than the reality, and I like to think that US law doesn't do "customer support" like a well-known FAANG. (Where it's just good business to let some fraction of a percent of people be wrongly locked out of their accounts, rather than invest in covering those edge cases.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EqualJusticeUnderLaw.jpg

Defending copyrights held by small fry is usually of negative value, which is why they do their best to give all the material away themselves. They want the exposure more.

The counterfactual to making an illicit copy of Thriller might conceivably be that you pay for an official copy. The counterfactual to making an illicit copy of Everybody Needs A Robot is not that you pay for an official copy. It's that you go do something else, which is worse for the artist.