What I mean by "enabling" is if someone actively helps in the commission of the violation. No one can argue that recording devices do that since it's the user who actually does the copying using the device. Maybe if pirating was the *only* thing the device does the maker would be liable (like selling a program that only functions to break DRM).
It would be like arguing a gun maker is guilty of murder or the bartender is guilty of vehicular manslaughter... In the case of a web site, it becomes a problem if they are knowingly facilitating pirating. If they don't because they respect their user's privacy, then I don't see how they can be liable. It should be the task of the IP owner to demonstrate in court that the site owner is deliberately taking part in the copying.