Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Louis Stanton
- 1:24-cv-07289
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Stanton’s text is a request—not a ruling—to identify an unnamed internet subscriber through a subpoena.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC seeks information from Verizon Fios that could identify the unnamed defendant; the requested discovery could affect the privacy interests of the subscriber assigned the identified internet protocol address.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified defendant, known only by an internet protocol address, alleging that the defendant used the BitTorrent network to infringe its copyrights. The plaintiff says it owns copyrights in movies distributed through three subscription-based adult websites.
The plaintiff asked for permission to seek a subpoena to Verizon Fios before the parties’ required discovery-planning conference. It wants the subpoena to identify the subscriber assigned to the internet protocol address and asks that any initial scheduling conference be postponed until the defendant is identified and served.
The text is a request by the plaintiff, not a court ruling. Judge Stanton is identified in the supplied case information, but the filing itself is addressed to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald; the available text does not show whether the requests were granted or denied.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:24-cv-07289
- Louis Stanton
- Oct. 16, 2024
Nature of the Filing
The available text is a letter from Strike 3 Holdings, LLC’s attorney making a pre-motion request. It is not an order or opinion stating that the court granted or denied the requested relief.
Background
Strike 3 Holdings alleges that an unidentified John Doe defendant directly infringed its copyrighted works by using the BitTorrent file-distribution network. The defendant is identified in the filing only by an internet protocol address. Strike 3 Holdings says it does not know the defendant’s name or address, while the defendant’s internet service provider, Verizon Fios, may have records connecting the address to a customer.
The plaintiff states that it owns three subscription-based adult websites and the copyrights to the movies distributed through those websites. It also alleges that the internet protocol address was repeatedly used to infringe its copyrighted works. These are allegations described in the plaintiff’s filing, not findings by the court.
Requested Discovery
Strike 3 Holdings asks for permission to file a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) seeking leave to serve a third-party subpoena before the required Rule 26(f) conference. The proposed subpoena would be directed to Verizon Fios to obtain information identifying the John Doe defendant.
The plaintiff argues that early discovery should be allowed for good cause. It identifies five factors that it says courts consider in similar internet-copyright cases: a preliminary showing of copyright infringement, a specific discovery request, no alternative way to obtain the information, a central need for the information, and a minimal expectation of privacy. The plaintiff says it will address those factors in its anticipated motion.
The plaintiff also asks the court to postpone any initial scheduling conference, or not schedule one, until the defendant has been identified and served.
Disposition and Uncertainty
No disposition appears in the available text. It does not say that the court granted, denied, or otherwise decided either request. The supplied case information identifies Judge Louis Stanton, while the filing text appears to be addressed to Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald. The available materials do not explain that discrepancy.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.