Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. Legacy Archives

LimeWire Creators Liable for Copyright Infringement

Add as a preferred source on Google
Image used with permission by copyright holder

In what may turn out to be a major victory for the music industry, U.S District judge Kimba Wood has ruled that the creators of the peer-to-peer file sharing software LimeWire are liable for copyright infringement conducted by users of their application when they downloaded pirated music. In a 59-page ruling, Wood sided with more than a dozen record companies suing LimeWire, granting a summary judgement and finding LimeWire’s creators knew full well their software was being used to download copyrighted material. Wood ruled the company took no “meaningful steps” to prevent the infringement; moreover, LimeWire’s makers were “predisposed to committing infringement” and assisted their users in doing so. And in addition to LimeWire LLC being liable, principal LimeWire owner and CEO Mark Gorton was found personally liable.

“The court’s decision is an important milestone in the creative community’s fight to reclaim the Internet as a platform for legitimate commerce,” wrote RIAA chairman and CEO Mitch Bainwol, in a statement. “By finding LimeWire’s CEO personally liable, in addition to his company, the court has sent a clear signal to those who think they can devise and profit from a piracy scheme that will escape accountability.”

Recommended Videos

LimeWire has been tied up in court for years in battle with record companies and other rights-holders, but has continued to operate as a commercial peer-to-peer file sharing service. The issue before the court was not so much whether piracy took place on LimeWire (it does), but the extent to which LimeWire induced its users to engage in copyright infringement. In her ruling, Judge Woods cited numerous internal documents that LimeWire’s creators understood infringement was being conducted through the service and, through various actions, guided users to download unlicensed copyrighted material. What’s more, LimeWire put up no technological barriers to infringement, and made no attempt to remove copyrighted material from its service, filter content shared by its users, or even educate its user base.

Judge Wood has not paid out penalties in the case; the next major action is a status conference set for June 1 which will set the schedule for a penalty phase and handling some still-unresolved issues in the primary case.

In a brief statement, LimeWire wrote it “strongly opposes the Court’s recent decision. LimeWire remains committed to developing innovative products and services for the end-user and to working with the entire music industry, including the major labels, to achieve this mission. We look forward to our June 1 meeting with Judge Wood.” The company has not announced whether it intends to appeal the ruling.

Geoff Duncan
Former Contributor
Geoff Duncan writes, programs, edits, plays music, and delights in making software misbehave. He's probably the only member…
Google’s Gemini 4 Carbon is built for complex coding and cybersecurity tasks
Gemini 4 Carbon currently ranks first on Artificial Analysis' updated Intelligence Index.
google-gemini-4-carbon

Google just dropped its latest AI model, Gemini 4 Carbon, designed to tackle complex coding jobs and cybersecurity threats. The company claims it can work through difficult engineering problems for days, finding hidden bugs and developing fixes across large codebases.

Gemini 4 Carbon also takes the top spot on Artificial Analysis' updated Intelligence Index, scoring 59 points, pushing out Claude Opus 5.5, OpenAI's GPT-6 Astra, and even its own predecessor Gemini 4 Argon.

Read more
A top-shelf MacBook Pro PROLED XDR can be yours for just under $15,000
For a mere $14,549, you can get yourself the fully kitted 16-inch MacBook Pro PROLED XDR with the beefiest laptop chip that Apple has to offer
MacBook Pro PROLED XDR laptop

Apple has just introduced a redesigned MacBook Pro with a few bells and whistles. The focus this time around is on a thinner and lighter build, and an upgrade to a touch-sensitive OLED screen without any ugly notch. And, in case you were wondering, there is definitely a price premium to pay for these niceties, which also include a glowing Apple logo at the back. What if you wanted to get the best that Apple has to offer? Well, the numbers are finally here.

For a mere $14,549, you can get yourself the fully kitted 16-inch MacBook Pro PROLED XDR with the beefiest laptop chip that Apple has to offer, and the best memory configuration in tow. For nearly $15,000, you treat yourself to the 16-inch version of the laptop with a nano-texture glass layer on the screen to reduce reflections and glare.

Read more
What’s actually new and different on the MacBook Pro PROLED XDR? Here’s everything you need to know
Touchscreen vs. non-touchscreen MacBook Pro differences

Apple has unveiled its first-ever touchscreen MacBook Pro. The company seems a bit confused about the naming, calling it the "MacBook Pro with PROLED XDR Display," which is tough to remember. If you look past that and review the full spec sheets, you might ask a genuine question: what are the differences between the touchscreen and non-touchscreen versions?

Given that Apple continues to sell both variants together, that's a genuine question. Luckily, you don't have to spend more time lining up the spec sheets side by side and hunting for differences hidden in the fine print. I took that bullet for you. Here's everything that's different between the PROLED XDR Display and the regular MacBook Pro.

Read more