I guess it should be no surprise, in the wake of the US Supreme Court's Grokster decision and its endorsement of an "inducement" theory of liability, that it is reported that some of the "underground" P2P operations, like WinMX.com and eDonkey.com, appear to be trimming back (eDonkey) or ceasing (WinMX) operations.
Let's assume that these entities were "inducing" copyright infringement. If so, then Grokster may have served a useful tangential purpose -- to eliminate entities that are truly seeking to violate basic copyright protections. But, what if they have been used for dual purposes -- legal and illegal -- without having "induced" such illegal behavior? Then their preemptive withdrawal from the market is an unfortunate loss and a very bad sign for the development of new technologies that have dual uses.
Will P2P survive? Probably; its here, and, as one commentator mentioned in the previously-referenced article, its use will likely grow and increasingly be associated with entirely uncontroversial enterprises. But what about the next innovation that is only being considered and tested on campuses and in computer labs? How far Grokster has gone to chill such innovation may be a function of how many dual-use technologies appear in the coming years.