There’s no such thing as entrapment in the world of copyright, unfortunately.

That said, something kinda similar did happen in the Viacom v. YouTube case. It’s been over a decade since I read it so forgive me, but I think YouTube discovered that Viacom themselves had been uploading bits of The Simpsons, and I believe sometimes processing them to look like amateur clips because they believed that the exposure helped them in the long run.

To be clear, I’m not saying it’s a good argument. OP just grossly mischaracterized it.

The main issue with this is that it would either A. Be massively open to abuse in the same way that YouTube is now, but would come with greater penalties in that you can lose Internet access. Or B. Force your ISP to do a copyright analysis every time they receive a report.

Every illegally downloaded book is a lost sale

This is straight out of 2007. What an awful position to take.

And that’s fucking wild about someone fighting you over your own music. The DMCA is a fucking joke.

No, that would be if they tried to assign liability to Bell Labs. ISPs have traffic logs and are assigning IP addresses to pirates. I’d say it’s closer to holding Hertz accountable when people who rented cars break the speed limit. Still a terrible idea though.

But I’m concerned how they can request this with a straight face, since we’ve seen wholesale abuse of the DMCA since its inception. Ask anybody who has a YouTube channel with more than 5k subscribers about the false reports they’ve received from companies claiming to own someone else’s music. People are going to have their access cut off based on fake reports.