Actually, bit torrent has been marketed to the copyright cartel and they have actively investigated it and there is increasing adoption. Not in the way the pirates want, of course, but as a means to reduce their bandwidth costs by offloading it to their viewers. Such schemes do not allow freeloaders, of course, nor do they interoperate with other bit torrent clients like utorrent. Nor do the copyright cartel describe them as bit torrent, but one of the issues for any traffic shaping service is to discriminate between the various bit torrent clients, permitting some and rejecting or throttling others.
You also have some weird understanding of reality. "Old school piracy" was nothing like streaming. Old school piracy was using a client to find music and pictures being shared by other people and downloading them. In fact, originally it was direct download and single source. But ISPs make good use of asymmetric bandwidth and "swarming" was invented to improve performance -- particularly important as the content being pirated shifted to video. But single source or swarmed, there was never any streaming involved, it was always download in total, then consume.
Or did you mean *real* old school, back in the day with Usenet and binary postings? Where the files were split and encoded, then had to be decoded and combined? This was also not streaming.
Or did you mean *really* old school, when piracy was done with sneakernet? Which was also not streaming.
BTW: the actual reason Netflix went to streaming was in order to lower costs. They paid for the shipping -- each way -- of those disks. They have to pay for the streaming bandwidth, but doing so is cheaper than shipping. Pirates had nothing to do with it.
The actual precursors to streaming movies/tv shows have nothing to do with piracy and rather more to do with corporations like Real and Macromedia.
But, hey, what's a little real history between random people on the Internet?