But they were facilitating piracy by indexing links to copyrighted material.
In that way it is no different to people putting links to cracked software here and Neal doing nothing about it.
I don't deny that copyright law has to be reformed but with this case it seems that there was intent and they knew it was copyrighted material.
Now I see the telegraph guy was asking if google for example could be held liable if an internet search provided a return which was a link to illeagly hosted copyright material. I think that is disningeous as the google search is largely automatic so it won't know if the material is legit or not. With pirate bay there was definitely knowledge it was illegal.
__________________
|