Neither of those. It's generally violating the law to distribute that copyrighted content, but the content itself isn't illegal. They're asking about what's in there where the actual content is the problem.

As far as being casual about mass piracy, I think the preservation outweighs the damage, and on top of that copyright is too restrictive in the first place. If we could massively boost the internet archive and have dozens of similar institutions, and didn't paywall science articles, and brought copyright down to a reasonable duration, then after that I would be much easier to convince that instances of piracy are bad.