Personal copies are one thing, distributing copies is another. This case involves the distribution of copies.
I see this case as a hit against makers of devices used for criminal activities. Of course, it won't just stay within the relm of direct devices of criminal enterprise, but it will be abused.
I disagree with this ruling because it says that a person is open to civil liability if their device is used in a crime. No one forced the people to use the software to distribute files.
Your not worth it. Continue believing what you want, but when FR is finally shutdown for sharing copyright material, don't come crying to me. Because I did warn you ahead of time.