I mentioned this one one figure skating forum,where some people do watch "illegal" streams of sporting events, particularly US nationals, where people on the west coast don't want to wait for the tape delay Some people there think I am paranoid when I mention that some streams of their favourite skating events might dissapper. Some people are going to need a lot of convincing about this.

Depending how it it is written, yes. If it is anything like Klonbuchar's bill, it would only apply to those making money from their streams, and most streams of PPV events would fall under that. With the cost of cable, and to order a PPV fight, it wold be hard for a streamer to do it without charging for something, either with ads on the site, or charging viewers to watch the streams.

There is also the DMCA safe harbor that would prevent YouTube, itself, from being prosecuted.

This law would only affect the PROVIDERS of streams. I will say again, that VIEWING the video in your home would NOT be a crime. A "public performance", under 17 USC 101 implies that you displayed it in a PUBLIC place, which your home is NOT. Under 17 USC 101, the VIEWER is NOT doing a "public performance" by merely VIEWING the videos.

Nope. Streaming to your computer screej in your home is NOT a "public performance". Under 17 USC 101, You have to be displaying it a public place. Your computer screen in your home, or somwehere private deos NOT count as a "public performance". So VIEWING the content in your home is NOT a "public performance" under 17 USC 101.

If it is like Klobuchar's bill, it will ONLY apply to those who SEND the streams, NOT to those who VIEW them. And Netflix and others will not be affected, as the law would ONLY apply if viewers were in the United States. Streaming to viewers OUTSIDE the United States would not be covered under this law. So Netflix streaming to viewers outside of the United States would not be affected.