Originally Posted by gideongallery

he didn't claim that p2p for personal use was fair use. he was talking about the specific condition where the download was by an agent of the copyright holder, and therefore authorized by the copyright holder.

That the only evidence against him, they have no proof that anyone else downloaded from him.

it meets all the conditions btw, since no sale would be lost in that transaction so he has a very good appeal. IT just means the process of creating the infringement and then suing based on that created infringement has to stop. You actually need proof of an actual lost sale before you go after the next guy.