[stonetools]

Not all lawyers' works, but all legal opinions and court rulings, are in the public domain in the US. Lawyers don't get a choice about copyrighting many of their most complicated and influential creative works.

This may surprise you, EW, but most lawyers get paid for doing such work. Indeerd, many insist ion getting paid even before doing such work. I imagine, too, that even if you donate some of your work, that you insist on getting paid for the work you contract to do.

Nobody said, "I oppose any attempt at law enforcement against piracy." Several people have spoken in favor of legal action against piracy--in cases where evidence is brought to a court, and a plaintiff and defendant both have the right to present a case, and a ruling is made by a jury.

Actually, a couple people here do oppose any attempt at law enforcement , because piracy should not be illegal .Others describe it as a minimal, annoying , harmless affair, not worthy of effort at law enforcement. And still others seem that to say that any attempt at LE would inevitably violate the civil rights of the innocent. So f ar, I think its a minority who have spoken in favor of any form of law enforcement.

The objection is not to law enforcement but to an attempt to circumvent the need for court cases by imposing restrictions on people and organizations who aren't directly breaking laws, but whose legal actions allows lawbreaking to go on in their presence. Courts going after ISPs for activities being coordinated through TPB are punishing a lot of ancillary people; if those breaking the law are the uploaders & downloaders, find them.

Would you apply that rule, to say, child pornography? Because ISPS are in fact ordered to block child porn sites. In the USA, gambling sites are blocked.
As for laws for finding and punishing uploaders& downloaders, you and many others here appear to oppose any such laws.