After reading through some of the legal briefs and a few of the blogs, I am struck by the clarity of the SCOTUS decision. It was quite apparent that Grockster and StreamCast were blatantly and openly encouraging the use of copyrighted products without payment by the user. In fact, they were flaunting it. They were asking for the attention and they got it.

The arguments made by the Respondents briefs (supporters of Grockster's position in some way) have made it very clear that they fear for the creative freedom of technology inventors and rightly so because there was no telling what the SCOTUS would rule, nor the parameters that would be outlined in such rule. However from what I can see, the ruling seems quite fair and logical and does not infringe on the ability of inventors to invent nor create added liability for them. Rather it puts some responsibility onto the would be or current business stakeholders to responsibly and legally pursue revenue opportunities. And at a minimum to abstain from promoting illegal activities in favor of making a buck.