[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The court has no jurisdiction over the sites themselves; that's exactly the reason that this process exists.

Consider this: if a website is under the jurisdiction of the court, would the court still use this process?

Originally Posted by HarryT

That would require a change in the law. Of course any law could theoretically be passed in the future.

Are you sure that this is required? Is there a law that is stopping this from being "High Court orders British ISPs to block all torrent sites"?

Originally Posted by murraypaul

But as long as they process DMCA takedown requests, they are covered by the Safe Harbor regulations, and immune.
Google have processed 14.75 million requests in the last month:
http://www.google.com/transparencyre...als/copyright/
Details for
KAT: http://www.google.com/transparencyre...omains/kat.ph/
H33T: http://www.google.com/transparencyre...ains/h33t.com/
Fenopy: http://www.google.com/transparencyre...ins/fenopy.eu/

Google have received requests to remove 433,343 URLs for H33T. At $50 per URL, it would cost 21M$ to remove them from H33T itself.

And here we see the wonderful world of copyright: a right of the corporations, not of the authors.