A lot of the confusion about this has resulted from the ability of the word "streaming" to refer to both directions. The issue is not people watching a stream.

A lot of the confusion about this has resulted from the ability of the word "streaming" to refer to both directions. The issue is not people watching a stream. Nor does the bill likely cover individual torrent/p2p users who upload works or even potentially seedboxes or services like Mega. So as far as people who are intentionally trying to pirate copyrighted works for the purpose of not buying them, the applicability is very limited. It would only apply to one of those streaming/DDL movie sites, or possible a torrent site themselves depending on the definition of "transmission service." You would have to be a fool to try and set that up from anywhere where the US could get to you anyway. The problem, and the concern from groups like EFF, is that on the other hand people who are not really pirates (ie. their purpose is not to serve a substitute for buying the work) but who may violate copyrights in the process (ex. streamers who don't have distribution rights to music playing in the background) could be covered as long as they are in some way monetized, and it would not be hard to play this as a "major infringer" with a number of songs.