Grokster loses at Supreme Court
The US Supreme Court decided that peer to peer file sharing service/software providers can be sued for copyright violations of users. It comes down to the intent of the provider, which is to be gleaned from its instructions and advertising material, and what steps it took to try to limit unauthorized copying. The matter now goes back to the lower courts to determine whether in this instance that was the case.
I have not read the decision in detail, but in practice there is a lot of gray area here. So does this mean that if I provide software that will share any file, and if I make sure I say that it is only to be used to swap authorized files, I'm not liable if users use it for other things?