How to Apply the Notice and Action Requirements under Art. 16(6) sentence 1 DSA — Which action actually?

Abstract Art. 16 DSA and its framework for notice and action mechanisms are one of the DSA’s central due diligence obligations for hosting services, including online-platforms. Such services must put in place user-friendly reporting mechanisms, so reporters can easily notify them about allegedly illegal content. Following proper notification, Art. 16(6) S. 1 DSA obliges providers to make a decision in a “timely, diligent, non-arbitrary and objective manner”. What does that actually mean? This paper addresses these issues involved: First, what is the interplay of Art. 16(6) S. 1 DSA with other, more traditional takedown obligations? Can IP rights holders, based on Art. 16 DSA, initiate a Digital Services Coordinator (DSC) to act against, e.g., copyright violations? Does Art. 16(6) S. 1 DSA harmonize national tort law stay-down obligations? What triggers Art. 16(6)’s imperative: Every “notice” or only specific ones received through dedicated reporting mechanisms? What is the legal standard for “diligent” decisions: Must platforms enforce their Community Standards, or only relevant laws? Speaking of laws: Must platforms consider any Member State’s laws? And might the enforcement of Art. 16(6) S. 1 DSA through Art. 54 DSA advance civil law remedies against hosting providers?