I don't see this affecting the MPAA or RIAA, as their copyrights are on the works themselves, and involve little code, if any at all. We're talking songs and movies here.

This ruling is on computer code, which has been argued for some time, with first sale doctrines and whatnot. When you have physical property, like a CD, that you want to resale on ebay, companies like Autocad have skewed this definition and removed all first sale doctrine rights. Then you have companies like Adobe Apple, Oracle, etc that claim any similar coding in your own software, or if you try to torrent said software, that you are stealing from them.

The two biggest points up to now have been:

Code is simply math...that anyone with similar coding capabilities could have written the same thing...ie, code doesn't pass the transformative test of getting a patent. Math is nature and can't be patented, and the code as a whole is just an arrangement of math. You can't patent 2+2=4.

When you torrent something, you are NOT depriving the original company of said code. It could be argued as well that you are NOT depriving them of a lost sale either, since it cannot be proven that those who downloaded it would have bought it in the first place.

This ruling specifically states that the "theft" wasn't a theft at all, because the code still existed for use by the original "owner."

It will be interesting to see how this gets translated for ongoing cases like Oracle vs Google and Apple vs the world.