Except, uh, you cut out the object of this sentence, which is the service provider, not the user.

That is, github, not the user, is supposed to be the person responding expeditiously to remove. Contacting someone is neither "removing" nor "disabling access".

The law is simply not ambiguous here, and github trying to play this game is not likely to go well in an actual court, as much as i'd like it to be the case (i know other companies have been threatened on exactly this point before).