> could have fooled me. If we're being realistic, I doubt this will affect more than 10k people. Could have fooled me x2 -- we both can pull numbers out of our

> could have fooled me. If we're being realistic, I doubt this will affect more than 10k people. Could have fooled me x2 -- we both can pull numbers out of our bottoms. ;) The part you seem to be downplaying is this: there are things that can't be directly measured. Public resentment is one of them. It's one of those variables that grows and grows until at one point an eruption happens. Include that in your analysis, history has proven that this factor does exist. > Good thing most people still pay in that case. The other part of that metaphor is that 999,999 people may pirate, but 5m or so are still making that product profitable. anti-piracy isnt just about making pirates relent, but to shut down future pirates in later products. Obviously, yes. It's a scaremongering tactic. I'll admit they are succeeding, one after another trackers fall down with a tempo that the pirate community does not seem to be able to sustain; they bring some other trackers back up and that seems to be enough for them for now, if I read TorrentFreak's articles well that is. So back to the original topic: what stands in court is only a short-term factor. Again, looking at the pirate scene and the steadily declining revenue from streaming and the slow and steady grow of piracy (again), I'd say part of the people had enough. Start persecuting more aggressively and things might escalate in unpredictable ways. How will this unfold? Beats me, and you, but I am interested in following the battle.