I can't decide whose grammar I hate more: Anonymous's grammar or Copyright Labs's. Why add an ignorant and incomprehensible rant to a legal notice when you can materially alter its content and actually cause major problems? And who would ever use the word "u" when apologizing for a malformed legal notice?
Anyway, I would have changed the infringement notice to:
Dear $site,
Copyright Labs, registered copyright agent for $big_studio, has recently done a survey of the content on your website, $site_url. This letter is notice that $big_studio has granted you an irrevocable license to distribute $infringing_content indefinitely. There is no need to respond to this letter.
Regards,
Copyright Labs on behalf of $big_studio
If you're going to commit a crime, you might as well do a good job.
Its pretty clear by now that the language Anon uses is a parody of itself. I can guarantee you that the statement was written and reviewed by committee.
I highly doubt anyone has a hard time identifying it. This goes back years, to early early 4chan days. Representing themselves in the voice of the incompetent yet proving absolute competency is Anonymous's calling card. Getting hacked and having to explain a clearly phrased, embarrassing email bomb is about as bad as it could get for a security contractor. Way worse than the same if it were just a defacement.
Anyway, I would have changed the infringement notice to:
Dear $site,
Copyright Labs, registered copyright agent for $big_studio, has recently done a survey of the content on your website, $site_url. This letter is notice that $big_studio has granted you an irrevocable license to distribute $infringing_content indefinitely. There is no need to respond to this letter.
Regards,
Copyright Labs on behalf of $big_studio
If you're going to commit a crime, you might as well do a good job.