If anybody read that quote and then went on to do something like Grooveshark, I'd guess it's safe to say they need to adjust their reality compass. It may be OK to push the boundaries in certain areas, grow big and make amends later. But if your concept is to break boundaries, have no model for actual growth apart from ripping other companies off and not even a chance of making amends (apart from maybe changing the law in every country of the world, which won't happen), I guess it's very clear you're doomed to failure.
I don't like what the record industry is doing in general these days, but grooveshark was always very obviously shady if not illegal.
> I don't think the DMCA envisioned hosting providers that are specifically designed for infringement.
In order to keep their immunity, an online service provider must "not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity." The provision clearly targets hosting providers that are designed for infringement, indicating that they did envision that.