Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 108.201.184.243

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that the person using AT&T U-verse IP address 108.201.184.243 downloaded and distributed its copyrighted adult motion pictures through BitTorrent. Strike 3 said its detection system established connections with the IP address, downloaded files from the defendant, and confirmed the files using BitTorrent’s identifying data. It alleged that the defendant had infringed 29 movies over an extended period and that Strike 3 had not authorized the distribution.

Strike 3 filed one copyright-infringement claim against the unidentified defendant. It then asked for permission to serve AT&T U-verse, a nonparty internet-service provider, with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. The requested information was limited to the name and address of the person or people associated with the IP address.

Reasoning

The court applied the standard for early discovery before the parties’ usual initial discovery conference. Courts generally require “good cause,” meaning that the need for expedited discovery must outweigh the prejudice to the responding party. The court examined whether Strike 3 had identified a real person who could be sued in federal court, described its efforts to identify that person, shown that its claim could withstand a motion to dismiss, and shown that the requested discovery was reasonably likely to lead to information allowing service of process.

The court held that Strike 3 satisfied all four requirements. It found that the allegations identified a person who used the IP address to download and distribute the movies and that the alleged activity had been traced to the Northern District of California. The court also found that the IP address alone was not enough to identify the person. It concluded that Strike 3 had sufficiently alleged a preliminary copyright-infringement claim because it alleged ownership of the movies’ copyrights and unauthorized copying and distribution. Finally, the court accepted Strike 3’s allegation that AT&T U-verse could identify the person associated with the IP address.

Protective Order and Disposition

Because the internet subscriber might not be the person who infringed the copyrights, and because the allegations involved sensitive personal matters, the court issued a limited protective order. Strike 3 could not publicly disclose information released by the internet provider until the Doe defendant had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court ruled on that request. If the Doe defendant did not file such a motion within 30 days after the information was disclosed to Strike 3’s counsel, the limited protective order would expire. The court also allowed identifying information in an anonymity request to be filed under seal.

The court GRANTED Strike 3’s ex parte motion for expedited discovery. Strike 3 could immediately serve AT&T U-verse with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking the Doe defendant’s true name and addresses. AT&T U-verse had 30 days after service to notify the Doe defendant. The Doe defendant then had 30 days after service to challenge the subpoena, including by asking the court to quash or modify it. If no timely challenge was filed, the provider would have 10 days to produce the responsive information. The subpoenaed entity had to preserve the information, and any disclosed information could be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights described in the complaint. The order did not decide whether the Doe defendant was liable for copyright infringement.