Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 22, 2024

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:24-cv-05656
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
7
DiscoveryCivil ProcedureIntellectual Property
In one sentence

In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Engelmayer granted early discovery allowing Strike 3 to subpoena Verizon for Doe’s identity.

Who this affects

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may obtain limited identifying information from Verizon Online LLC about John Doe, while John Doe receives notice and an opportunity to challenge the subpoena or seek anonymous treatment.

What happened

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified only by an Internet Protocol address, alleging that Doe illegally downloaded and distributed Strike 3’s copyrighted adult movies. Strike 3 asked to obtain Doe’s name and address from Doe’s internet service provider, Verizon Online LLC, before the usual discovery period began.

The court found that Strike 3 had shown a preliminary copyright-infringement claim, made a specific request, lacked another way to identify Doe, needed the information to continue the case, and had a stronger interest in identification than Doe’s privacy interest. The court also recognized the risk of mistaken identification and ordered protections for Doe.

Judge Engelmayer granted Strike 3’s motion. Strike 3 may serve Verizon with a subpoena seeking only Doe’s true name and current and permanent address—not an email address or telephone number. Verizon must notify Doe, who has 60 days to challenge the subpoena or request anonymous treatment; if no one contests it, Verizon has 10 days to provide the information, which Strike 3 may use only to protect its rights in the lawsuit.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-05656
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Aug. 22, 2024

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that John Doe, whom it knew only through the Internet Protocol address 96.224.54.240, illegally downloaded and distributed Strike 3’s copyrighted adult motion pictures using the BitTorrent file-sharing system. Strike 3 asked for permission to serve Verizon Online LLC, Doe’s internet service provider, with a subpoena before the parties’ initial conference. The subpoena sought Doe’s true name and address so Strike 3 could serve Doe and pursue the case.

Court’s Analysis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) generally prevents a party from seeking discovery before the parties’ required conference unless the court authorizes it. The court applied the standard of reasonableness and good cause and considered five factors:

- Strike 3 made a concrete preliminary showing of copyright infringement by identifying the copyrighted works and describing the alleged unauthorized copying and distribution, supported by forensic evidence. - The request was specific because it sought only the name and address associated with the identified Internet Protocol address. - Strike 3 had no practical alternative way to obtain the information because BitTorrent is largely anonymous and the internet service provider is the entity that can connect the Internet Protocol address to a subscriber’s identity. - The information was necessary for Strike 3 to serve Doe and move the case forward. - Although viewing and sharing adult movies could cause embarrassment, the court found that Doe had only a minimal privacy expectation in sharing copyrighted material and that Strike 3’s interest in identifying Doe outweighed that privacy interest.

The court nevertheless ordered protections because of the risk of false identification and the resulting potential for annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden.

Ruling

Judge Engelmayer granted Strike 3’s motion. Strike 3 may serve Verizon Online LLC with a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 subpoena seeking only John Doe’s true name and current and permanent address. The subpoena may not seek additional information, including an email address or telephone number, and must include the court’s order and a notice to Doe.

Verizon has 60 days after being served with the subpoena to provide Doe with copies of the subpoena, the order, and the notice. Doe has 60 days after service of the subpoena to challenge it, including by seeking to quash or modify it, or to request permission to litigate anonymously. If Doe contests the subpoena, Doe must notify Verizon, which must withhold the contact information until the court rules. If neither Doe nor Verizon contests the subpoena within 60 days, Verizon has 10 days to produce the responsive information. Strike 3 may use disclosed information only to protect its rights stated in the complaint.

The authoritative version

Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.