Actually, I would argue that it is an attack on the rule of law. The problem is the victim wants to collect the evidence and pass judgement. That's an awful idea since it is a conflict of interest (e.g. the victim is conducting the investigation) and because there is no independent assessment of the evidence. (There is a reason why we keep the police and courts separate.) Such a policy would be legalized vigilantism.

As for the, "mak(ing) the internet what it is," bit: I don't think that we should be proud of the scummier bits of it. Indeed, I think that we should be doing something to reduce the illegal activities online. But whatever we do, it should be just. Clearly this is not just, so it should be buried.