What is the aspect of the DMCA that has often been abused and places the burden of proof on the accused?

The aspect of the DMCA that has often been abused and places the burden of proof on the accused is the takedown notice. Under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), copyright holders can send a takedown notice to online service providers (OSPs) to request the removal of infringing content. This process allows the copyright owner to claim infringement without a detailed investigation or proof of actual infringement being necessary at that point.

Once a takedown notice is issued, the online service provider typically must act quickly to remove the content or face potential liability. This creates a scenario where the accused party—often the content host or the individual who posted the content—bears the burden to prove that the content does not infringe upon copyright. They must respond with a counter-notice to refute the claim, which can be a lengthy and complicated process. This imbalanced approach has led to situations where individuals or entities face significant challenges in defending themselves against unjustified claims, because even unfounded allegations can result in immediate content removal.

The other options, such as puppet plasticity, the online service provider exemption, and decryption program prohibition, do not represent a similar dynamic involving a burden of proof shifting to the accused within the context of copyright