That is a good point. However, that isn't quite as Gray as it used to, no thanks to the aussies and the yanks.
In Australia, Kazza has been found guilty of Authorizing copyright infringement. Kazaa, for those who do not know, is a peer-to-peer program that allows its users to search, share and access files stored on other users' computers
The fact that Kazaa does not in itself actually share anything did not stop them from being liable.
This Australian judge said,
Section 101 of the Australian Copyright Act provides that copyright is infringed by a person who, not being the owner of the copyright and without the licence of the copyright owner, authorises another person to do in Australia an infringing act.
I have concluded that this more limited claim is established... My reasons may be summarised...:
(i) despite the fact that the Kazaa website contains warnings against the sharing of copyright files... it has long been obvious that those measures are ineffective... substantially to curtail... copyright infringements by users. [Kazaa] have long known that the Kazaa system is widely used for the sharing of copyright files;
(ii) there are technical measures...that would enable the respondents to curtail ... the sharing of copyright files. The respondents have not taken any action to implement those measures...
(iii) far from taking steps that are likely effectively to curtail copyright file-sharing, Sharman Networks and Altnet have included on the Kazaa website exhortations to users to increase their file-sharing...