I think you mean DMA, not DMCA. DMCA mostly protects copyright holders. DMA is about protecting users and competitors from platform lock-in. Bending for Apple would just make that lock-in harder to challenge.

DMCA provides some rather important protection for service providers (including small-scale services like web forums, not just ISPs and web hosts) - it makes them not liable for copyright violations by their users, so long as they take down infringing content upon receipt of a DMCA notice.

But I agree, that's probably not what OP meant.

Doesn't "DMCA", make, well, the DMCA notice a thing?

Precisely. What it replaced was rightsholders suing web services (like a forum or web host) as a first resort, which was a much more cumbersome and painful process for all parties.

If it was more painful for the suing party, it was a good thing.

Now all it needs is send some letter to github and they take down content, no questions asked, how is that better? It is for court to decide.

> If it was more painful for the suing party, it was a good thing.

It's a lot easier for a large plaintiff - like a record label, a movie studio, or a software publisher - to file a lawsuit than it is for a small defendant like a web site operator to defend against one.