The argument stands that LimeWire induced users to use the service to download copyrighted materials, and benefited financially by the use through the placement of ads throughout the service. If someone created a P2P network with no financial purpose at all, for example, Utorrent, or some other app, maybe with a built in search function, then there would be no ground for the industry to sue.
Like I said, I’d like LimeWire to win this case because their service truly is decentralized, and I believe a loss here would have a further chilling effect on the technology. But I think it’s a long shot. It's pretty well known that people downloading Lime Wire to collect music sans payment drives people to the service, and directly benefits LimeWire financially.
As long as this is the case, they’ll have an uphill battle. Nonetheless, the LimeWire counterclaim is a powerful indictment, and while it’s a little dry (no more than this article), serves as a great read to bring us up to date, on the “story so far” in the world of the RIAA vs. the People. It’ll be one to watch.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
1 - clan garriock
actually various groups such as the sierra club, earthfirst, aclu, greenpeace, etc prevail in lawsuits all the time where they cannot show actual harm was caused them or may be caused. Yet even when they can not prove prevailing interest, courts still grant them standing.