It’s a blunt force instrument. Always was.
Fun side effect is that you can use it as a blunt force instrument, too - don’t like what someone is saying online? DMCA. Competitor champing at your heels? DMCA.
I still think the best way to kill it is mass abuse of the process.
An expectation is that “wrongdoers” just do not bother to oppose and everything works faster.
Then there are corporate policies which make this weirder (like YouTube who says: “if people send too many dmca request towards you, we chose not to see you as a customer”. But this has nothing to do with law)
(f) Misrepresentations.—Any person who knowingly materially misrepresents under this section—
(1) that material or activity is infringing, or
(2) that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification,
shall be liable for any damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, incurred by the alleged infringer, by any copyright owner or copyright owner’s authorized licensee, or by a service provider, who is injured by such misrepresentation, as the result of the service provider relying upon such misrepresentation in removing or disabling access to the material or activity claimed to be infringing, or in replacing the removed material or ceasing to disable access to it.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/512#f (scroll up slightly as the anchor-link places the top under the navbar)
Of course its on the proverbial me to prove that they're at fault and I dont have the money or time ...
I imagine one day they will kick the wrong horse though and someone will sue the company for it & GH/GL/whoever for not giving fair recourse or something.