Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.250.34.75
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:25-cv-08118
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Broderick granted early subpoena discovery to identify the subscriber linked to the alleged copyright infringement.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek identifying information from the internet service provider. The unidentified subscriber associated with Internet Protocol address 67.250.34.75 may challenge the subpoena, including anonymously, before any information is disclosed. The internet service provider must notify the subscriber, preserve the information, and follow the court’s disclosure restrictions.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified John Doe, identified by Internet Protocol address 67.250.34.75, alleging that the defendant used BitTorrent to download and distribute its films without permission. Strike 3 said it could not identify the defendant without information from the defendant’s internet service provider.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown a sufficient initial copyright-infringement claim and had no other apparent way to learn the defendant’s identity. Because the alleged conduct involved adult films, the court also recognized the risk that the subscriber connected to the address might not be the person who engaged in the conduct and could face pressure to settle to avoid public identification.
Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted Strike 3’s motion to serve the subpoena, subject to protections allowing the subscriber to challenge it anonymously before disclosure. The internet service provider must notify the subscriber, preserve the information, and withhold it during the challenge period or until the court orders disclosure.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 67.250.34.75 · No. 1:25-cv-08118
- Vernon Broderick
- Oct. 23, 2025
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that the unidentified 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. The complaint identified the defendant only by Internet Protocol address 67.250.34.75 because Strike 3 did not know the defendant’s identity.
Strike 3 moved for permission to serve a subpoena on the defendant’s internet service provider before the parties’ required discovery-planning conference. The 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 required conference. It found that Strike 3 had stated an initial copyright-infringement claim sufficient for this motion and appeared to have no other way to obtain the alleged infringer’s identity. The court also noted that litigation could not proceed unless the defendant was identified.
The court recognized that the subscriber listed in the provider’s billing records might not be the person who engaged in the alleged conduct. A single wireless router can serve multiple users, including neighbors, passers-by, or members of the public using an unsecured network at a café or airport. The court therefore found it appropriate to protect the subscriber’s opportunity to challenge the subpoena before personal information was disclosed, particularly because the allegations concerned pornography.
Order
Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted Strike 3’s motion for leave to serve a third-party subpoena, subject to specified procedures:
- Strike 3 may immediately serve the subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 on the internet service provider, seeking the name and address associated with Internet Protocol address 67.250.34.75. - The provider must serve the subscriber with the subpoena and the court’s order within 15 days after service of the subpoena on the provider. - The subscriber has 45 days after being served to file a motion contesting the subpoena, including a request to proceed anonymously. The provider may not disclose the information during that period. - If the subscriber does not file a challenge within 45 days, the provider must produce the required information within the following 10 days. - The provider may also challenge the subpoena, but its filings must not reveal the subscriber’s identity to Strike 3. - If a challenge is filed, the provider must withhold the information until the court resolves the challenge and orders disclosure, and must preserve the information in the meantime.
The order authorized early discovery only. It did not decide whether the defendant committed copyright infringement.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.