Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 24.4.124.129

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that it owns copyrights registered for certain adult motion pictures. It alleged that an unidentified defendant, John Doe, used an internet-connected device and the BitTorrent file-sharing network to download and distribute unauthorized copies of 26 movies over an extended period.

Strike 3 identified the defendant by the internet protocol address 24.4.124.129. It alleged that MaxMind’s geolocation service traced the address to a physical address in the Northern District of California and identified Comcast Cable, Inc. as the internet service provider and owner of the address. Strike 3 sought the name and physical address of the person or persons whose Comcast account was associated with that address.

Because Doe had not been identified or served, no opposition was filed. Strike 3 asked for permission to serve Comcast with a subpoena before the parties’ required discovery-planning conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f).

Early subpoena

The court explained that it could allow discovery before the Rule 26(f) conference when the requesting party showed “good cause.” Good cause exists when the need for expedited discovery, considering the administration of justice, outweighs prejudice to the responding party. The court also considered factors concerning early discovery aimed at identifying an unknown defendant.

The court found that all four identification-related factors favored Strike 3:

The court also found that the broader good-cause factors supported early discovery. The proposed subpoena was limited to the subscriber’s name and physical address, was intended to allow the case to proceed against an unidentified defendant, and imposed a limited burden on Comcast. The court concluded that the need to identify Doe outweighed the prejudice to Comcast.

The court therefore granted Strike 3’s application for leave to serve the limited third-party subpoena on Comcast before the Rule 26(f) conference.

Protective order

The court separately issued a limited protective order because the subpoena could identify either Doe or an innocent third party who paid for the internet service. The court found that the allegations involved sensitive and highly personal subject matter and that confidentiality was needed to protect against annoyance, embarrassment, and unfairness.

Information Comcast produced in response to the subpoena must be treated as confidential by all parties until the court rules on a motion by Doe or another affected third party seeking continued confidentiality or permission to proceed anonymously. If Doe or another affected person does not file such a motion within 30 days after receiving notice that Comcast produced the information, Strike 3 may ask the court to withdraw or modify the protective order.

The court also ordered that any identifying information included in a request to proceed anonymously be filed under seal until the court could rule on that request. Strike 3’s notice to Doe or another affected person must include a copy of the order.

Disposition

In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 24.4.124.129, Judge Peter H. Kang granted Strike 3’s ex parte application for leave to serve a limited, early third-party subpoena on Comcast and issued the limited protective order. The order did not determine whether Doe was liable for copyright infringement.