> It's weird to me that folks now feel entitled to content in the way that piracy allows. They shouldn't, but that is not at all what this case and discussion

> It's weird to me that folks now feel entitled to content in the way that piracy allows. They shouldn't, but that is not at all what this case and discussion are about. The scenario here is an unrelated third party being accused of being complicit in a crime merely for hosting a general-purpose tool that could be used for piracy but can be used for many other things. The equivalent analogy would be if Home Depot is convicted of being a participant in every home burglary in their area simply because they sell sledgehammers and drills and other tools that could conceivably be used by someone to break into a house.