The org in question, website linked to in the article, published a response/“rebuttal” press release.

I shared my assessment and conclusions from reading it in this comment.

The AdGuard post is certainly much more convincing than their “rebuttal” with logical errors and misrepresentations.

Suuuuuuuuuuure. It’s all about protecting the kids. Ever notice how shadowy organizations are sometimes about the kids, but never protecting them?

I have to say, the initial reports puzzled me. This begins to make more sense, that someone who doesn’t like site mirroring has been attempting to get the site taken offline.

My guess is that it’s not about CSAM (that was used as the leverage) and it’s probably not about paywalls either.

Most likely, someone wanted to get some unflattering but true information about them removed from the Internet without drawing any attention to it with a RTBF request.