folder and by running LimeWire, Defendant intended to barter his images of child pornography in the expectation that he would receive other LimeWire users’ images of child pornography. Indeed, Defendant admitted he used LimeWire to obtain some of his child pornography. Plea Agreement at ¶ 21(A). Therefore, Defendant intended to traffic in and distribute child pornography. See United States v. Todd, 100 Fed.Appx. 248, 250 (5th Cir.2004) (“The LimeWire program was designed to share or barter files.... By downloading the images and making them accessible to others, [the defendant’s] conduct met the definition of “trafficking” in section 2G2.2.”), vacated on other grounds, 543 U.S. 1108, 125 S.Ct. 1039, 160 L.Ed.2d 1031 (2005); cf. United States v. Horn, 187 F.3d 781, 791 (8th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Brown, 333 F.3d 850, 853-54
holding that trading tapes of child pornography in order to augment a defendants personal collection constitutes distribution  holding that mailing child pornography to another in the expectation of receiving similar materials in return constituted distribution for purposes of  2g22b2 recognizing continuing harm from defendants knowing possession of child pornography holding that trading of child pornography is distribution for purposes of  2g22b2 holding that distribution of child pornography to encourage a meeting to engage in sex was sufficient to warrant enhancement