Editing Grokster (section)

== Impact of legal threats and fallout from Grokster’s demise ==
In the aftermath of the Grokster warning, many users became alarmed that their IP addresses were being stored. Prosecution of such individuals relies upon what has commonly been referred to as a process of [[doe subpoena]] in which prosecutors are required to gain a series of subpoenas in order to find out the identity of the user behind the IP address in question. Following the shutdown of Grokster, blogs became inundated with concerned users fearful of the warning; however, there have been no reports of the use of doe subpoenas in this case.

Research into the effects of warnings such as the one left on Grokster’s website has shown that while these warnings can result in a substantial reduction in online file sharing of individuals, the overall availability of downloadable content did not diminish. Furthermore, researchers cannot account for how much of this reduction in individual file sharing is simply shifted to other file sharing programs. In cases where the RIAA has issued threats, the users who conduct the most file sharing usually reduced their daily transactions to levels below the level of prosecution. In effect, these warnings have only caused only a brief reduction in overall online file sharing.<ref>{{Cite journal|title=Sharing Activity: An Analysis of Music Industry Legal Reactions|jstor=10.1086/501085|publisher=The University of Chicago Press|journal=Journal of Law and Economics|first1=Sudip|last1=Bhattacharjee|first2=Ram|last2=Gopal|first3=Kaveepan|last3=Lertwachara|first4=James|last4=Marsden|date=2006-04-01|doi=10.1086/501085|volume=49|issue=1|pages=91–114|s2cid=14550974|url=https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=mgmt_fac|url-access=subscription}}</ref>