If you hired someone to do a job, and as far as you could tell they simply hadn't done anything, you could certainly go to court. Even more seriously, if you h

If you hired someone to do a job, and as far as you could tell they simply hadn't done anything, you could certainly go to court. Even more seriously, if you had been ordered to do something by the court, and it looks like you hadn't then you'd be in trouble. And rightly so. Given the example in the article, if IsoHunt were given a list of films that included "Zero Dark Thirty" from 2012 and the search results are full of Zero.Dark.Thirty.2012... Then it looks like the filter is either 1) nonexistent or 2) horrendously bad at its job. It's not like they were filtering it out but people were putting in "One.Light.Sixty.3012" or being accused of letting through anything with the word "zero" in it, this is a specific example where a keyword filter should work easily. You can argue that the original ruling was unfair, but if they were ordered to do something by the court and say they have when they really haven't (or have deliberately built it wrong) then I have little sympathy. It's not like the filter would be hard to build.