Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.116.118.107
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:25-cv-08117
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Broderick authorized protected early subpoena discovery to identify the alleged copyright infringer.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the identity of the internet subscriber associated with IP address 98.116.118.107. The subscriber and the internet service provider receive procedures allowing the subscriber or provider to challenge the subpoena before identifying information is disclosed.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified internet subscriber, identified by an Internet Protocol address, alleging that the subscriber used BitTorrent to download and distribute its films without authorization. Strike 3 said it could not identify the defendant without information from the subscriber’s internet service provider.
The court allowed Strike 3 to serve the provider with a subpoena before the parties’ required initial discovery meeting. The court found that Strike 3 had made a sufficient preliminary showing of copyright infringement and appeared to have no other way to identify the alleged infringer.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted the motion, but required protections for the subscriber. The provider must notify the subscriber, who has 45 days to challenge the subpoena or ask to proceed anonymously; the provider may not disclose information while a challenge is pending.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 98.116.118.107 · No. 1:25-cv-08117
- Vernon Broderick
- Oct. 23, 2025
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that the defendant used the BitTorrent file-sharing network to download and distribute Strike 3’s films without authorization. Strike 3 asserted a claim for direct copyright infringement. Because Strike 3 did not know the defendant’s identity, the complaint identified the defendant by the Internet Protocol address allegedly associated with the activity: 98.116.118.107.
Strike 3 asked for permission to serve a subpoena on the defendant’s internet service provider before the parties held the discovery conference normally required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). The requested subpoena sought the name and address associated with the Internet Protocol address.
Court’s analysis
The court applied a flexible standard requiring reasonableness and good cause for discovery before the Rule 26(f) conference. It found that Strike 3 had stated a preliminary claim of copyright infringement sufficient for purposes of the motion and appeared to have no other way to obtain the alleged infringer’s identity. The court also recognized that the person responsible for activity associated with an Internet Protocol address might not be the person or entity listed in the provider’s billing records. A single wireless router can serve multiple users, including people other than the subscriber.
Because the allegations involved downloading or distributing adult films, the court found it appropriate to protect the subscriber’s ability to challenge the subpoena before personal information was disclosed. Strike 3 represented that it would not object to alleged infringers proceeding anonymously, and the court found no specific reason to doubt Strike 3 or its counsel’s good faith. The court nevertheless imposed procedures to preserve that opportunity.
Order
The court GRANTED Strike 3’s motion for leave to serve a third-party subpoena, subject to these conditions:
- Strike 3 may immediately serve the defendant’s internet service provider with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 seeking the name and address associated with Internet Protocol address 98.116.118.107. The subpoena must include a copy of the order. - The provider must notify the affected subscriber and provide copies of the subpoena and order within 15 days after being served. - The subscriber has 45 days after service of the subpoena to file a motion challenging it, including a request to proceed anonymously. The provider may not disclose subpoenaed information during that period. - If the 45-day period expires without a challenge, the provider must provide the necessary information to Strike 3 within 10 days. - The provider may separately challenge the subpoena, but must avoid disclosing the subscriber’s identifying information in its filings. - If a challenge is filed, the provider may not disclose the information until the court resolves the challenge and orders disclosure, and the provider must preserve the information while the challenge is pending.
The opinion concerns permission for early discovery and procedures for challenging the subpoena; it does not determine whether the defendant committed copyright infringement.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.