I think there is a certain logic to claiming damages on the copies that have been taken down, since they're also claiming that those copies need to be erased, and that blocking is insufficient. It's their premises that are flawed.
"...there's no specific protection in place for these contents, which some courts have argued contain no "expectation of privacy" thanks to constant "checkins" with third party providers and services."
The is no expectation of privacy for things I do inside my home with the doors locked, lights off and shades drawn because I do other things in public.
Anything I tell my bank is also public knowledge, including my PIN. Because they're a third-party provider or service.
So I recently found a reference that got me interested in a particular film, and noted that when I searched Google for it that film, I got a number of DMCA notices in place of download links.
Using my mouse (and my astonishing Internet P0w0rz) I selected the next search engine in the browser-provided pull-down list and clicked Search. In three mouse clicks and as many seconds I had more download links than I could possibly use.
Forcing Google to filter search results is SO effective because, you know, Google Is The Internet.
Somebody tried to use a Grandson Trick variant on my mother-in-law recently, claiming she was my daughter [insert older daughter's name here], had been arrested in Oregon for drunk driving and needed money wired to her for bail. My MIL isn't that easily tricked, she told the woman to call my wife, then called my wife herself. In the end the story got passed around with a lot of chuckles because a) my daughter drinks very little, b) doesn't drive (no license, though we're working on that) and c) was safely here with me in Sacramento.
It would have been even funnier if she's used my YOUNGER daughter's name. Hilarious, in fact. I wish somebody would try that, the whole family would be laughing at them for months.
The Register's coverage added that there may have been sharks in the water.
But I have to add that there was one difference between this and most of the other "distracted by tech" stories I've read. In this case, at least the woman just came right out and admitted she screwed up. She didn't blame the tech, or her unfamiliarity with the area, or the sun in her eyes, or the government for putting an ocean right where people are going to stumble over it by accident. How often do you see people doing that these days?
She also didn't panic when she fell in, but did the best thing she could, lie still and wait for rescue. Training or natural aplomb? I'm somewhat impressed either way.
Sure, laugh at her mistake. But give her credit, she handled it well and owned up. If she hadn't, you'd have made fun of her attempts to shift the blame. Since she did, credit where credit is due, please.