Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 107.142.109.91
- William Alsup
- 3:24-cv-03858
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Alsup granted early discovery so Strike 3 could subpoena AT&T Internet for the subscriber’s identity.
Strike 3 Holdings may serve a limited subpoena on AT&T Internet Inc. The unidentified subscriber and other interested parties may challenge the subpoena, and AT&T Internet must protect and preserve the requested information under the court’s instructions.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified subscriber assigned IP address 107.142.109.91, alleging that the subscriber distributed Strike 3’s copyrighted films online. Strike 3 asked to identify the subscriber before the parties’ required initial conference.
The court found good cause for early discovery. It said Strike 3 identified alleged copying through BitTorrent, traced the activity to an IP address within the district, and showed that AT&T Internet could provide the subscriber’s name and physical address.
Judge William Alsup granted the motion. The subpoena may seek only the subscriber’s name and address for a limited period, and AT&T Internet must notify the subscriber. The subscriber and other interested parties may move to quash or modify the subpoena, and identifying information must remain protected under the order.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 107.142.109.91 · No. 3:24-cv-03858
- William Alsup
- Aug. 7, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that it owns registered copyrights in various pornographic films and that John Doe directly infringed those copyrights by distributing the films on the Internet through the IP address 107.142.109.91. Strike 3 sought leave to serve a subpoena on third-party AT&T Internet Inc. before the parties’ Rule 26(f) conference so it could learn the identity of the subscriber using that IP address.
Reasoning
Rule 26(d) allows a court to authorize discovery before the normal discovery period when doing so would be convenient for the parties and serve the interests of justice. The court explained that early discovery may be appropriate when the alleged defendant’s identity is unknown before the complaint is filed.
The court applied the district’s listed factors for determining whether good cause exists. It found that Strike 3 described the alleged copying with sufficient specificity, identified the copyrighted works and the alleged BitTorrent distribution, used industry-standard tools to identify an IP address traced to a physical address within the district, and showed that AT&T Internet could provide the subscriber’s name and physical address. The court also concluded that Strike 3 appeared to state a claim for relief and that the subpoena would allow Doe to challenge that conclusion if appropriate.
Ruling and Limits on the Subpoena
Judge William Alsup granted Strike 3’s motion. The ruling was without prejudice to motions by AT&T Internet, the subscriber, or another interested party to quash or modify the subpoena.
The court authorized Strike 3 to serve AT&T Internet with a subpoena under Rule 45, subject to these limits:
- The subpoena may request only the actual name and address of the subscriber assigned the specified IP address. - It may seek that information only for the period beginning fourteen days before the first alleged infringing act and ending fourteen days after the last alleged infringing act. - Strike 3 must attach the order to the subpoena. - Strike 3 may use information disclosed by AT&T Internet only to protect its rights described in the complaint. - AT&T Internet must serve the subscriber with the subpoena and the order within twenty-four days after being served. - The subpoena’s return date must be at least forty-five days after service on AT&T Internet. AT&T Internet may not disclose identifying information to Strike 3 before that date or before any motion to quash or modify is resolved. - AT&T Internet must preserve subpoenaed information while any timely motion to dismiss is pending. - Strike 3 may not publicly disclose the defendant’s name, address, telephone number, email address, social-media username, or other identifying information, apart from the IP address. Documents containing such information must be filed under seal with the information redacted from the public docket unless the court later orders otherwise and the defendant has had an opportunity to challenge disclosure. - Strike 3 must seek additional court permission before subpoenaing any other Internet service provider or seeking information about another defendant or IP address.
The court ordered that motions concerning the subpoena or the protective measures must be filed before the subpoena’s return date.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.