There is no yellow brick road. It's legal .. or it's not. Copyright Law says it's not - and it's explicitly black and white in this manner. Are you of a higher power than those that discussed, agreed to and put this law into place? I am most certain that you are not. What you are trying to do is twist it in some way that makes it ok for you - but instead, all that you are doing is condoning illegal activity. You absolutely cannot discuss how the law applies nor what it means when you're condoning illegal acts. Case law means crap if you don't have any couth or ethics - nor any regard for what the law says. Where's your case law showing someone has not been held responsible for this.
You can easily find case law for people (to include DJ's) that were found with media in violation of laws and agreements. Look at limewire or any other file sharing site where RIAA (or other similar body) got involved. In those specific cases, RIAA did not care if you were a DJ or other - in fact, if they knew you were a DJ, it was probably more difficult for you to get out of trouble.
Under Copyright Law (yes, it's an actual law, in an actual book), you may not retain any copies if you give the original to someone else. Period, end of story. Anyone here reading this is supposed to be a 'Professional'. Exactly how 'Professional' are you if you're advising to (or are) breaking the law? The law does not say - it's ok if you don't abide by these requirements or that I'm not going to check to make sure you're within the law (this is where Ethics pops in too - hmmmmm).
I'm no lawyer, nor do I pretend to be one. You seem to think you are one or have the capability or knowledge of one. RIAA stopped suing people not because there is no law to enforce - because they ran out of money. This does NOT mean that it's ok to break to law. Robbing a bank is wrong - even if there's no police officer present. Again, this is called Ethics, of which you are continuing to display none.