Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.170.255.103
- Laurel Beeler
- 3:22-cv-02242
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 8
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Beeler granted Strike 3’s request to subpoena Comcast for Doe’s identity in an alleged copyright-infringement case.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the identity and addresses of the unidentified defendant from Comcast Cable. The Doe defendant received notice and an opportunity to challenge the subpoena, and Comcast must follow the court’s production, preservation, and cost-related requirements.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified person linked to IP address 73.170.255.103, alleging that the person used BitTorrent to download and distribute its copyrighted adult movies. Strike 3 asked to obtain the person’s identity from Comcast, the internet provider associated with that address.
The court found good cause for early discovery because Strike 3 identified a specific alleged infringer, described its efforts to identify that person, stated a copyright claim that could withstand dismissal, and showed that Comcast was likely to have identifying information. The court did not decide whether the Doe defendant actually infringed the copyrights.
Judge Beeler granted Strike 3’s motion for expedited discovery and allowed it to serve Comcast with a subpoena for the Doe defendant’s name and addresses. The court also limited how the information could be used and temporarily protected it from public disclosure.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 73.170.255.103 · No. 3:22-cv-02242
- Laurel Beeler
- May 5, 2022
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that an unidentified person using Comcast Cable’s IP address 73.170.255.103 downloaded and distributed 37 of Strike 3’s copyrighted adult motion pictures through BitTorrent. Strike 3 said its infringement-detection system established direct connections with the IP address and downloaded files containing copies of its movies. Strike 3 alleged that it owned the copyrights and had not authorized their distribution.
Strike 3 filed one copyright-infringement claim under the Copyright Act. Because Strike 3 could not identify the individual associated with the IP address, it filed an ex parte application—an application made without first giving the opposing party notice—for permission to serve Comcast with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45. Strike 3 said the subpoena would seek only the name and address of the individual or individuals associated with the IP address.
Court’s analysis
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d) allows a court to authorize discovery before the parties’ usual initial discovery conference. Courts generally require “good cause,” meaning that the need for early discovery outweighs potential prejudice to the responding party.
Judge Beeler applied four factors used to evaluate requests to identify an unknown defendant through early discovery:
- Specific identification: Strike 3 alleged facts sufficient for the court to determine that the Doe defendant was a real person who could be sued in federal court. The alleged downloads and distribution occurred through an IP address traced to the Northern District of California, which the court said gave it jurisdiction over the defendant and Strike 3’s federal claim.
- Efforts to identify the defendant: Strike 3 described tracing the downloads to the IP address and explained that the IP address alone did not reveal the defendant’s identity.
- A viable claim: The court found that Strike 3 had sufficiently alleged a preliminary copyright-infringement claim. Such a claim requires alleged ownership of the copyrighted material and an alleged violation of at least one exclusive copyright right, such as reproduction or distribution. The court noted that direct infringement does not require proof of intent or a particular state of mind.
- Likely useful discovery: Strike 3 alleged that Comcast could identify the person associated with the IP address, making the requested discovery reasonably likely to produce information that would allow service of the lawsuit.
The court therefore found that Strike 3 had established good cause for early discovery.
Protective order
The court issued a limited protective order because the Comcast subscriber might not be the person who allegedly infringed the copyrights and because the allegations involved sensitive personal matters. Information Comcast released to Strike 3 could not be publicly disclosed 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 request within 30 days after the information was disclosed to Strike 3’s counsel, the limited protection would expire. The court also allowed identifying information in an anonymity request to be filed under seal.
Ruling and conditions
The court granted Strike 3’s Ex Parte Motion for Expedited Discovery. Strike 3 could immediately serve Comcast with a Rule 45 subpoena seeking the Doe defendant’s true name and addresses, attaching the court’s order.
Comcast had 30 days after service to notify the Doe defendant. The Doe defendant then had 30 days after receiving notice to contest the subpoena, including by asking the issuing court to quash or modify it. If that period expired without a challenge, Comcast would have 10 days to provide the responsive information to Strike 3. Comcast had to preserve the information while any timely challenge was pending, confer with Strike 3 about production costs, and could not charge costs in advance. Any information produced could be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights stated in the complaint.
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.