Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.223.200.177
- Laurel Beeler
- 3:24-cv-04538
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 7
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Beeler granted early discovery, allowing a subpoena to identify the alleged copyright infringer behind an IP address.
Strike 3 Holdings may subpoena Comcast Cable for the name and addresses associated with IP address 73.223.200.177. The unidentified Doe defendant receives notice and 30 days to challenge the subpoena, while Comcast must preserve responsive information and follow the order’s production and confidentiality requirements.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified defendant, alleging that the person using IP address 73.223.200.177 downloaded and distributed its copyrighted adult movies through BitTorrent. Strike 3 asked to subpoena Comcast Cable, the internet provider, for the subscriber’s name and addresses.
The court found good cause for early discovery because Strike 3 identified a specific potential defendant, described its efforts to identify that person, alleged a claim that could proceed, and showed that Comcast could likely provide identifying information. The court also recognized that the subscriber might not be the actual infringer and that the allegations involved sensitive personal matters.
Judge Laurel Beeler granted Strike 3’s application and authorized an immediate subpoena to Comcast. The order required notice to the Doe defendant, gave that person 30 days to challenge the subpoena, and temporarily restricted Strike 3’s public use of information Comcast disclosed.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.223.200.177 · No. 3:24-cv-04538
- Laurel Beeler
- Aug. 21, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that the unidentified defendant associated with Comcast IP address 73.223.200.177 used BitTorrent to download and distribute Strike 3’s copyrighted adult motion pictures. Strike 3 said its detection system made direct connections with the IP address, downloaded files containing copies of its movies, and used the files’ identifying data to confirm the alleged downloads. Strike 3 also alleged that it owned registered copyrights in the movies and had not authorized their distribution.
Strike 3 filed one copyright-infringement claim under the Copyright Act. Because it could not identify the individual associated with the IP address, it filed an application for early discovery under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(d) and 45. It asked for permission to subpoena nonparty Comcast Cable for the true name and addresses associated with the IP address.
Good Cause for Early Discovery
The court applied the four-factor test commonly used in the Northern District of California for identifying an unknown defendant through early discovery. The plaintiff had to show that:
- the Doe defendant was identified specifically enough to be a real person who could be sued in federal court;
- the plaintiff had described its efforts to locate and identify the defendant;
- the complaint could withstand a motion to dismiss; and
- the requested discovery was reasonably likely to produce information allowing service of process.
The court found that Strike 3 satisfied all four factors. First, Strike 3 alleged that the Doe defendant intentionally directed a BitTorrent client to download and distribute the movies, and it traced the downloads to the Northern District of California. The court said these allegations indicated an identifiable adult who was likely the primary subscriber or someone residing with and known to the subscriber.
Second, the court found that Strike 3 had explained that the IP address was not enough to identify the defendant and had described how the alleged activity was traced to the district. Third, the court found that Strike 3 had sufficiently alleged a basic copyright-infringement claim by alleging copyright ownership and unauthorized copying and distribution. Fourth, the court found that Comcast could identify the defendant through the IP address.
Protective Order
The court issued a limited protective order because the subscriber might not be the person who infringed the copyrights and because allegations involving downloads of adult movies could involve sensitive and highly personal information.
Information that Comcast disclosed to Strike 3 about the Doe defendant had to remain confidential until the defendant had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court ruled on that request. If the defendant did not file such a request within 30 days after the information was disclosed to Strike 3’s counsel, the limited protective order would expire. The court also stated that identifying information included in an anonymity request could be filed under seal while the court considered that request.
Order
The court granted Strike 3’s ex parte application for expedited discovery. Strike 3 could immediately serve a Rule 45 subpoena on Comcast Cable seeking the Doe defendant’s true name and addresses, and it had to attach the order to the subpoena.
Comcast had 30 days after service to provide the Doe defendant with the subpoena and the order. The Doe defendant then had 30 days after service to file a motion contesting the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. If no timely challenge was filed, Comcast would have 10 days to produce responsive information to Strike 3. Comcast also had to preserve subpoenaed information while any timely motion to quash was pending.
The order further required the subpoenaed internet provider to confer with Strike 3 and prohibited advance charges for producing the information. Any information disclosed in response to the subpoena could be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights described in its complaint. The order authorized discovery to identify the defendant; it did not decide whether the Doe defendant actually infringed Strike 3’s copyrights.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.