Ginsberg’ concurrence is bad. The evidence was insufficient to demonstrate, beyond genuine debate, a reasonable prospect that substantial or commercially significant noninfringing uses were likely to develop over time. This confuses “substantial” with “commercially significant” and doesn’t give enough time for technology to develop out of the early adopter stage into more widespread public use. I wonder if there are studies on answering machines, pagers, cell phones, and who was the primary user when those technologies were first introducted. I have read that it was prostitutes and drug dealers, and I know that having a pager used to be considered part of probable cause to believe that someone detained on the street was dealing. Where would doctors and patients be if we took that early use and imposed liability on the pager companies as a result?