I don't really get why peer to peer's keep getting shot down. I was just re-reading some of the Grokster statements. Mostly from this 2005 Salon article. The gist was that if the programs induced people to infringe then they were illegal. That just seems stupid and arbitrary. It seems that if a program just made you read and click a statement saying that you the user agree to not use the application for infringing on copyright then the company should be in the clear.

It's kind of like guns. If you shoot someone, to a large degree it's your intent that determines your crime/non-crime/obligation (murder, self defense, or service to your country).

But I suppose the betamax ruling was really only 5-4 to allow recording for personal use. That's not a slam dunk for the individual...

I also don't understand why opensource, freeware for peer-to-peer doesn't proliferate. If noone claims ownership of the application, who is there to sue or shut down? But , noooo, every one wants some profit out of it, not just the RIAA. Seems like word of mouth would be sufficient. I wouldn't name it Pirate Bay though...