I called my ISP they said they were forced to send them to me and recommended I stopped downloading things....
First of all there's no way in hell i'm gonna download an 8GB video...period...second...i'd never even heard of those movies...so fuck that...
I looked up the lawyer that the letters were coming from, found out he was some random copyright troll and had been harassing people in canada all over the place pretty much the day after the laws changed. So I found a fax number for their office and with a handy little script...I showed them what it was like to be flooded by bullshit.
The letters stopped within a day and I haven't gotten one since.
That is fantastic. What did the script do? Did you roll your own fax software, or use some third-party/open source binary? I'm curious because every 2-3 years I'm required to send some stupid fax, and I never really found a good (free) way to do it.
It was some small project I found on github or something. I had to compile it. Sorry I can't be more helpful. I think I searched for send fax from linux and variatins of that.
It was about that point where the company would start asking people to work overtime to try to get the backlog under control. People would fax and refax, then call and we would get an internal message from the call center asking us to prioritize this claim, etc. The behinder we got, the behinder we got because now we were having to look through multiple copies of the same file only to determine they were all duplicates and so forth.
Even without paper copies of faxes, faxing someone a ton of stuff over and over creates problems on the receiving end.
That sounds like a old fashioned ways in front of a problem, and in front of a solution.
There are multiple automated(or even just "hand" sorting) solutions that could chew through the duplicates.
If you hadn't fixed it already I would recommend seeing if there is anything in the subject or body that you can use to filter the emails with.
It's amusing how fully automated American legal threats make the default assumption that everywhere on the internet is subject to American federal laws.
The traditional email inbox email@example.com is supposed to be used for actual network operational issues which impact the health of a network (ddos, IP space hijacks, SMTP blacklists, abusive colo and dedicated server customers, etc).
There are so many paid and non-paid streaming options to choose from it makes me wonder why download content?
However this isn't as much the case with movies/TV. Streaming in that realm is fractured, expensive, and most of the offerings are poor. With music you subscribe to service X and get access to 90% or more of what you'd want. With movies or TV, you have to subscribe to a handful of services all at once just to get access to maybe half of the content you'd want to watch. $10/mo for music, okay. Netflix+Hulu+HBO+Amazon+etc; adds up fast.
Outside of Netflix, every other provider has some combination of terrible app/UI, streaming problems, or ads.
Even if you look past all that, how do you play all these subscriptions? The device landscape fragments everything further. And god help you if you want global search on all your subscriptions, or want access to an Apple library.
Contrasted with pirating + Plex? Yeah...
And the problem is only getting worse as all the big players in market continue to wage war. See, for example, Disney pulling out and forming their own subscription.
Don't get me wrong. I think the world is better today than it was when all we had was cable. All of these content companies getting direct access to subscription money is incentivizing productions that could never have existed under the older ad-driven models. But in terms of overcoming piracy? They are leagues away.
I don't think music piracy will ever die without lowering prices. This month I spent $70 on music and I torrented about $1000 worth. If I stopped torrenting there would be no extra money going to content owners because I already spend as much as I can afford on music.
(The same argument applies to movies, books and video games, but all of all these, a piece music is most likely to be re-listened to many, many times.)
Another motivation is data formats. Streaming services don't exactly offer highest quality, and while a normal person may not even hear a difference (especially with cheap sound equipment), audiophiles care about this.
Their UI is pretty awful and only ever gets worse. They even have plenty of ads - granted just for their own content, but still. It's ads. And extremely intrusive ones - big autoplay videos that default to sound on (it does at least remember when you mute them) and other large banners inserted right into the middle of the selection page.
People are lazy. They will use the easiest process, even if they have to pay it.
As a user, I'm lazy. I want to watch a movie, not deal with billing bullshit of some company. For them it may be the most important part, for me it's just an incidental task, a speedbump on the road to my goal. As a user with some disposable income, I'm actually willing to pay extra to make this problem less inconvenient.
Having to worry which platform to pay this month in advance, who streams what at which point, and whether or not the movie isn't already gone from all of them because of $reasons, is making things more inconvenient. Very quickly, torrenting looks more attractive again - it offers better UX, and you get to keep a file in the end, DRM-free.
(And if you're afraid of torrenting while living in a country where only uploading is illegal, there's plenty of bootleg streaming services that offer worse movie quality and throw in occasional cryptominer with their ads, but are still less of a hassle than juggling multiple "legit" streaming services, and give you movies & series that are no longer available on any "legit" one, again because $reasons.)
You give your credit card information one time (mine autofills from my password manager.) And then they autobill you each month. Never causes me any hassle.
For me, the criterion is whether I can download it, without any DRM. So I can access whenever I like. Without fear of inactivation. And without having usage tracked.
It might have something to do with the fact that despite being free to operate above the table and having large revenue flows, user experience is often better on the dark side. Which is just baffling.
With a decent ad/popup blocker and browser setup, some shady server in Vietnam called "watchallseriesonline.interbutt" or whatever is simply more pleasant than hunting down which streaming service has your content, having to buy all of them anyway, dealing with strange and futile DRM plugins, deal with industry drama, deal with hostile "engagement-driving" user interfaces, etc etc. The IP owners are nearly always a convoluted web of big telecom corporations who are battling with each other to ensure that all users are losers by wantonly Balkanizing all our culture's media.
Add to that the fact that almost all legit streamers immediately triple-dip on their customers. They charge subscriptions, they shovel ads at their users despite the fact it's a paid service, and they suck up and gargle all their user's personal data and sell it to the highest bidder or fumble it to some hacker. Some torrent site will also try and do all that, but in a way that's a lot easier to sidestep.
I mean I guess it sucks for the content owners (often not the actual creators as stated above, but that's another story) but there needs to be at least some good faith from them before they expect an unorganized mass of millions of independent users to return good faith to them. Masses of people respond to incentives and are basically deterministic. Telling them "you should really do this, it's the right thing to do" and expecting a demand-side miracle is just irrational.
No doubt, right? I want to watch a Canadian artist sing a song about Canada, at a Canadian event, and get told "Not available in your country."
Personally, I listen to some obscure (in the West) music from Japan and it’s difficult to locate in any service other than YouTube. YouTube videos can be and are deleted at any time with no warning, and they only let you ‘offline’ them while they are available online.
You know what I’d really pay for? A good recommendation engine that can point me to anything in any language based on my taste.
This could actually be worse for copyright infringers...
The math doesn’t make that economical unless you’re going after an astonishingly large infringer.
There was actually a very recent SCC case  between Rogers and a copyright enforcer, where Rogers was appealing a federal court decision that Rogers itself had to bear the cost of fulfilling these orders. If that stood, it would give copyright enforcers carte blanche to pursue copyright suits against minor violators.
 Commentary here: http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/750214/Media+Entertainment+La...
Link in Swedish:
I don't think taking people to court has a great cost-benefit ratio.
If you're using BitTorrent with multiple people downloading from you, that could turn into serious money quickly.
This bill makes sure they target the right people and use due process to actually go after infringers, not pull some sort of scam to throw bait and see who bites.