All I’m saying is, this site is known to try and push the limits of what’s allowed. I’m not saying their name should have any weight in court, but they often do things they know is illegal thinking they’ll most likely get away with it. As for this trial, before the trial started there was an extensive back and forth between them and Playboy about these links.
Of course, in the perfect world Playboy would have gone to the person who actually uploaded the images and left it at that. In which case this entire trial would have been unneeded.
Again, the EU now has conflicting precedents and, yes, needs to settle this in future cases to bring clarity. I don’t think, however, that suddenly the internet is going to crumble into little pieces (things like the link-taxation and breaking net neutrality are way more dangerous on that front)
Also “amicus curiae” is a Latin term, so it’s already “European”… 
Yeah, I’m not sure the EU courts would have asked a big corporation on the matter, but there are definately organisations that could have provided useful advice in this matter.
