As far as I know, there is no illegal downloading. The phrase has gained much "traction" in movie, music, and book markets, and is used by politicians and publications alike. But, as far as I know, there isn't a crime called downloading. You can't be charged with downloading. What you can do however that will open you up to some form of legal action is make copies of material for which you have no legal right to make copies. A copyright holder is, generally, the only person or entity entitled to produce copies of what they have copyrighted (because, duh, they hold the right of copy). But in downloading a file, you are copying that file to your computer. The copyright holder can, in principle, seek damages. They're more likely to go after facilitators of copyright violation than to go after you, but they might.
As far as I know, a criminal offence is a violation of an ordinance or statute that prohibits certain conduct. You can get arrested. A civil offence by contrast is an administrative violation. You'll probably get fined. And as far as I know, in most jurisdictions, copyright violation is a civil offence. Which is to say, there seems to be a great amount of misdirection in discussing the piratical illegality of the entire porn-sharing pedophiling internet torrent scum like you and I. Thus, I am wondering what's really what.
I'm wondering, for instance, can I really suggest to others that they can torrent a file if they want to watch a movie. In Australia, right now, the local tv station that holds the local broadcast rights to the X-Files has elected to hold off broadcast until, as it happens, tomorrow, Jan 31. The rest of the world saw the first episode on Jan 24. Are tv stations in Australia goading people into "illegal downloading"? Should I tell family members how to see episodes before the tv lets them? What the hell, people? And if I ever go back to a real country, and the last ten years of my internet history is looked at (thanks, NSA), what then?