Say a man bought a gun and later used it in a crime - should the gunmaker be held responsible?

File sharing is no exception. Personal responsibility has to factor in somewhere.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that Internet programs should be held accountable for providing users the opportunity to swap copyrighted material. This includes file-sharing Web sites such as Sharman Networks Ltd., LimeWire LLC, Grokster Ltd. and StreamCast Networks Inc.

The ruling specified file-sharing networks who intentionally provide services for the purpose of illegal file swapping for profit.

Not only will Internet users who download music and movies be held responsible for their actions, so will the programs aiding them in their endeavor.

Let's observe a moment of silence for the old version of Napster, which was laid to rest after the music industry held it responsible for the acts of individuals. Despite the fact that the music files were on users' computers, Napster was buried because of the software it provided for the actual sharing.

It's probably not the initial intention of these file-sharing sites to have users illegally upload pirated material and swap it with thousands of other people. The incriminating intent will not be easily proven by courts.

But some of them had to - and have to - know it's happening.

According to the actual ruling, reports showed that not only did many file-sharing services know about the copyright infringements, but some actually used it as a selling point for consumers.

If such sites policed their own material and searched for licensed files, they would find that most of the swapping is illegal in nature. Such efforts by the peer-to-peer networks would alleviate most of the blame.

Looking back to the invention of the blank cassette tapes and CD writables, the cornerstones of our file-sharing ways, there was less hoopla about manufacturers than the actual perpetrators who abused the technology's purpose.

Can you hold a company or site responsible for not foreseeing the potential misuses of their products?

Illegal activity aside, technology is headed in this direction: communication and file sending via the Internet. This growth shouldn't be hindered by individuals who are morally questionable and take advantage of available file-sharing clients. Peer-to-peer networking is beneficial if regulated.

The people who engage in file sharing make a choice to evade copyright laws and should be therefore punished individually. Even with this ruling, people will still be held responsible for their actions.

Gunmakers don't intend for gun owners to use their firearms illegally. There are many legal uses for guns.

It can't be easily proven that companies intended for individuals to use the free Internet software in this manner.