Seems GoPro issued a statement (see bottom of http://fstoppers.com/gopro-issuing-dmca-notices-for-use-of-g... ), but it still is a poor and stupid way to go about things.
“The letter that was posted next to the review on DigitalRev was not sent in response to the review. Obviously, we welcome editorial reviews of our products. This letter was sent because DigitalRev is not an authorized reseller of GoPro products and they were using images and had incorrect branding and representation of our product in their online commerce store. As part of our program – we ask merchants who are selling our product to use authorized images. That is why DigitalRev was contacted. But – our letter did not clearly communicate this and that is something we will correct.”
If you read the DMCA takedown, you'll see that it refers specifically to the URL of the review, not to any other URL, and certainly not to the location of any product sold on any e-commerce site.
In fact, their e-commerce site still contains GoPro products. http://www.digitalrev.com/search?t=pro&q=gopro
In short, either GoPro are lying through their teeth, or their legal team engaged in a monumental cock-up. In either case, this looks like a clear-cut misuse of the DMCA, a claim that can easily be supported by GoPro's own words, if you take them at face value. I don't.
Seems like an easy mistake to make.
[1] Screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/PWJp2BU.png
Their "clarification" isn't.
http://chillingeffects.org/dmca512/faq.cgi#QID569
So yeah pretty much nothing holds up.
[1] http://www.digitalrev.com/product/gopro-hero3-black-edition/...
An obnoxious use of an obnoxious piece of legislation, followed by a smokescreen. More likely cock-up than conspiracy, but leaves a nasty taste.