Jon Elson writes:

If they actually ARE holding a bunch of
copyrighted material in their newsgroup archives, then they do
have a liability.

Define "holding". The DMCA specifically allows it. Usenet continues.
Napster was instantly destroyed. All based on the illusion of
"communication" versus "storage".

Ultimately, the government is not going to enforce the Mafiaa's right to
control invisible magnetization patterns secreted in your computer, any
more than they did the invisible magnetization patterns on VHS tapes
secreted on your 1980s bookshelf. Or photon bundles in fibers or
electrons in cables. It will just be painful to expire the litigious
ownership of antique media, but expire it must.

Copyright only works in tangible, expensive media trafficked in public.
Intangibles and private actions can't be controlled. That's why there's
no copyright enforcement of your memorizing copyrighted works, or the
images inside your eyeballs. RIAA has no means and no right to control
how the air vibrates inside a private home. Or the MPAA how the LCD
pixels flip.

De minimis non curat lex

The law does not concern itself with trifles.

Bit patterns are the *ultimate* trifle. Absolutely arbitrary
arrangements of the intangible, in limitless quantity. We all can own
terabytes of them. Inconceivable that the government will assert
sovereignty there.