> Not just that, but he did it publically, SELLING HIS ILLEGAL PRODUCTS.
What was he selling? The site looks like a free listing of other people's plugins for Kodi, hosted on other sites (github and the official Kodi add-ons repo, for the 5 add-ons that I looked at).
It looks like he's got ads up, and links to zips containing XMLs written by 3rd parties, that presumably provide the metadata to eventually reach some streamed audio/video/whatever. Calling it "selling his illegal products" is more than a stretch.
> 1) not piss off people with lots of money while breaking the law
Might as well drop "while breaking the law". Things won't end well if you piss of people with a lot of money legally either.
He's profiting from piracy. Recently the EU ruled that linking to pirate content transitively makes you a pirate, and similarly in the US aiding piracy is illegal. I assume that Canada has similar laws. So not only was he engaged in illegal activity - providing information on how to access pirate content, he was actively profiting from it.
What happened to him is absolutely the expected outcome of his activity.
> Recently the EU ruled that linking to pirate content transitively makes you a pirate, and similarly in the US aiding piracy is illegal.
How about links to links to pirated content? How many levels of indirection would it take to not be "linking to pirate content"? I assume that he must've received some kind of take-down notices (the site claims claim they haven't, but sure, we'll assume that they're just lying), but wouldn't it make as much or more sense for those notices to go to the account-holders on github where a lot of the repositories storing the actual connection data are?
With the information given, my opinion is that the connection is too indirect for the level of response. The site itself seems full of mostly-legal content (the same free channels that show up on my Roku, for example). It seems like overkill to me.
Which law?
> Not just that, but he did it publically, SELLING HIS ILLEGAL PRODUCTS.
What was he selling? The site looks like a free listing of other people's plugins for Kodi, hosted on other sites (github and the official Kodi add-ons repo, for the 5 add-ons that I looked at).
It looks like he's got ads up, and links to zips containing XMLs written by 3rd parties, that presumably provide the metadata to eventually reach some streamed audio/video/whatever. Calling it "selling his illegal products" is more than a stretch.
> 1) not piss off people with lots of money while breaking the law
Might as well drop "while breaking the law". Things won't end well if you piss of people with a lot of money legally either.