▁permanent ▁inj unction s ▁in ▁January ▁ 1 9 9 8 . ▁ ▁In ▁ 1 9 9 8 , ▁the ▁R I AA ▁su ed ▁the ▁operators ▁of ▁two ▁more ▁sites , ▁resulting ▁in ▁permanent ▁inj unction s ▁and ▁mon et ary ▁damage ▁awards ▁against ▁the ▁defend ants , ▁who ▁were ▁also ▁required ▁to ▁perform ▁community ▁service . ▁ ▁In ▁late ▁ 1 9 9 9 , ▁R I AA ▁labels ▁su ed ▁Nap ster ▁for ▁providing ▁a ▁peer - to - pe er ▁file ▁sharing ▁network ▁for ▁MP 3 ▁files . ▁The ▁pla int iffs ▁claimed ▁that ▁Nap ster ▁" fac il itate [ d ] ▁pi racy ▁of ▁music ▁on ▁an ▁un pre ced ented ▁scale ." ▁Nap ster ▁became ▁bank rupt ▁during ▁the ▁case ; ▁and ▁has ▁since ▁been ▁taken ▁over ▁by ▁Ro x io ▁and ▁provides ▁a ▁download ▁service ▁which ▁is ▁san ction ed ▁by ▁the ▁R I AA . ▁ ▁In ▁ 2 0 0 2 , ▁the ▁R I AA ▁su ed ▁A im ster , ▁which ▁provided ▁a ▁similar ▁service . ▁ ▁In ▁ 2 0 0 3 , ▁MP AA ▁stud ios ▁su ed ▁Gro k ster ▁and ▁other ▁file ▁sharing ▁services ▁in ▁a ▁case ▁that ▁would ▁eventually ▁go ▁to ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁of ▁the ▁United ▁States . ▁ ▁The ▁court ▁held ▁that ▁produ cers ▁of ▁technology ▁could ▁be ▁held ▁li able ▁for ▁intent ▁to ▁indu ce ▁in fr ing ement . ▁ ▁In ▁ 2 0 0 6 , ▁R I AA ▁labels