Way to leave out context!

By no means were they suing for downloading alone. They were suing for sharing while downloading, and seeding after, and as "early seeders" they helped thousands obtain copies.

Right or wrong, it was absolutely not about just downloading. It wasn't about taking one copy.

In their eyes, it was about copyng then handing out tens of thousands of copies for free.

Again, not saying it was right. However, please don't provide an abridged account, slanted to create a conclusion in the reader.

Did you even read the title of the article? This is exactly what they are claiming is fair use.