Apparently not, if other courts agree with this one.
Second, the court made a ruling about the application of a law in a specific set of cases:
A company takes a link which they know points to illegal material, and publish it, for the intention of making profit.
Third, this is Civil Law. NOT Common Law. Precedence means nothing.
So, if that was actually true, due to (3), Google could have been sued thousands of times before, or Movie4k.to or so on – but they haven’t.
Even kino.to could only be sued because they paid the uploaders of illegal movies money – not because they linked to them.
Second, this specific case here doesn’t even apply to almost every other website.
The argument is "because they published it and claimed exclusivity to make money, they had to know it was illegal".
Which means if you have user generated content, standard C&D or DMCA stuff applies, and only if you violate that, it can be infringing.
Apparently not, if other courts agree with this one.