Couldn't it be argued that it (take down notice for 127.0.0.1) can -only- be a deliberate misstatement?
WB can not argue that the 'chance' of 127.0.0.1 hosting copyrighted content is anything but non-zero. This means that sending out take down notices regarding 127.0.0.1 are nonsense (i.e. deliberate misstatement).
WB can not argue that the 'chance' of 127.0.0.1 hosting copyrighted content is anything but non-zero. This means that sending out take down notices regarding 127.0.0.1 are nonsense (i.e. deliberate misstatement).