Our Supreme Court is about to consider the "file trial" in which those who sell software that allows file sharing stand accused of fostering the copying of copyrighted materials.

I don't get it.

If people who make guns aren't guilty (and quite rightly so in my opinion) of murder when a person uses a gun to kill somebody, why would a file-sharing software vendor be guilty of the copyright violations? Don't file-sharing programs also have legal, even beneficial uses? Why is this case even in court.

And finally, do we really believe that the 5-4 cases are that close in fact? I don't think they are. I think the Court essentially decides how things will turn out, and then the record reflects whether the case might go a different way in the future. Otherwise, how could such scholars look at the same facts and find so differently and by such a narrow margin? So I think 5-4 is the S.C.'s way of saying: "We are going with the "5" opinion but in the future you can say: gee, it was a 5-4 ruling so maybe it could go the other way."