No, they didn't they still haven't restored service, and they cut it based on completely fake reports, without any warning or communication. They're not trustworthy.
At least it's somewhat positive they "sort of" backtracked? To be clear, I'm in favour of these providers acting like utilities and staying out of content disputes.
It's rare enough that the CEO publishes a blog post every time they do it.
"This is a hard case and we would caution anyone from seeing it as setting precedent."