Since when was it required for someone to explicitly state "the purpose of this website is to commit this civil/criminal offence" for a court to rule that a website owner is intentionally committing or assisting in an offence? I mean, if it calls itself the Pirate Bay and publicly refuses to remove references to pirated material on request (whilst pruning links to fake torrents) it's pretty difficult to take seriously an argument that the preponderance of references to pirated material is merely incidental.