It is sort of silly since we all know what it really is used for right?Originally posted by jon
Anyone know where this one is going? It's really confusing. It seems like the court is taking forever just to arrive at the simple conclusion that everybody knows that Napster is around to get members who are interested in getting something for free that they would otherwise pay for!!!! So.... how much time do we, uh, all those Napster users have left??
I think the court is trying to take the philosophical approach because of the thought process beyond whether networking technology like Napster is inherently infringing. The stupid part is that they keep giving Napster chances that you wouldn't give to your misbehaving 4 year old. I think the Napster case is making the justice system look incredibly foolish and useless. It says "break the law if the other person can't afford the lawsuit or it will take forever to litigate it." Pathetic. 
