Oh fer cryin' out loud, people! Why do so many wail about what they fear the court did, rather than what it did? Only those products and services produced with the "object of promoting its use to infringe copyright" are in trouble. The burden is on the plaintiff to prove that this is the object of the producer, to foster infringement.
It seems some strongly-worded warnings and/or a "user agreement" window during installation which forbids the use of the program for illegal purposes would defend against this nicely. All the producers have to do is provide some good evidence that they are not actively promoting the illegal activity, and are, in fact, discouraging such use. That should keep them in business and out of hot water.
This ruling certainly provides more than enough grounds for legal harassment of even the most innocent activity. And fighting legal battles is not something small companies want to spend their money on, generally speaking. Even if you are in the right, paying for the lawyers can be a big drain for small operations.