I'm not sure how you came away from my comment with the idea that I disagree that the DMCA is a bad law. My argument isn't that that the law is good, but that I don't think it's anywhere close to the primary cause of this incident, and that there's much lower hanging fruit that could stop stuff like this. I'm also not sure why the _registrar_ needs protection in the case we're talking about; no part of this happened because the registrar needed protection, but the main cause of pain was that the registrar completely trusted a false third-party report that alleged _fraud_, not copyright issues.

To be honest, I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make at all with your comment. None of it seems to address anything that I said, and if anything, it almost sounds like you managed to infer the opposite of what I meant in most cases.