Is Google violating copyright by serving cached BitTorrent magnet links?

If you’re reading this, I’m assuming you know:

  • BitTorrent is a popular internet protocol for sharing files
  • It has legitimate uses (such as distributing ISOs of popular Linux distros)
  • It is also widely used to share copyrighted material without the copyright-holder’s permission

You may also know:

  • In order to download files with BitTorrent, you need to first get a specific ‘torrent file’ or a ‘magnet link’
  • Google keep’s a cache of information which is human-readable (like web pages and PDF files) but not of other ‘binary files’
  • If you use Google to search for a page (or if you browse with Google Chrome, and the page you want is temporarily unavailable), you have the option to view Google’s cached version of the page, instead of accessing the original server

Because the cached page contains all of the original links (including BitTorrent magnet links), it means that would-be downloaders can download files using BitTorrent without accessing any non-Google web sites.  After they get the magnet link, the rest is handled by the BitTorrent client (e.g. uTorrent).  This is pretty handy if you want to download a file and the original ‘torrent site’ is down, but doesn’t it open up Google to accusations of directly helping people to violate copyright?  (I am not a lawyer and this is not a rhetorical question.  I’m actually curious.)