I'm absolutely positive the DoJ can find a way to bend the definition of "for-profit" to go after a person who shares their Plex service with other people. The

I'm absolutely positive the DoJ can find a way to bend the definition of "for-profit" to go after a person who shares their Plex service with other people. The question of "did they profit" is a pretty low bar to clear. And in an era where people mindlessly exchange money via Venmo and similar platforms, it's probably not going to be difficult to find a union of the set "was granted access to plex account" and "has exchanged money in the past." I've seen prosecutors try to sell some rather asinine arguments, so there might not even be a requirement for money to change hands to be considered selling "for-profit," maybe bringing over some pizzas once or something is enough.