Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 174.160.76.56
- Edward Davila
- 5:24-cv-00440
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 7
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Davila authorized a subpoena to identify the unknown subscriber but required privacy protections.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may seek the unknown subscriber’s identifying information from Comcast Cable or another identified internet service provider. The Doe subscriber may challenge the subpoena or request anonymity, and the provider must follow the order’s notice, confidentiality, and preservation requirements.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe Subscriber Assigned IP Address 174.160.76.56, Strike 3 alleged that an unknown person used BitTorrent to download and distribute about 24 copyrighted adult films. Strike 3 asked to subpoena Comcast Cable for the subscriber’s name and address linked to the listed internet address.
The court found good cause for allowing this early discovery. It concluded that Strike 3 had identified a potentially real defendant, described its efforts to locate that person, stated a copyright claim that could survive an initial challenge, and sought information likely to identify the defendant. The court did not decide whether the subscriber actually infringed Strike 3’s copyrights.
Judge Edward J. Davila granted Strike 3’s application to serve the subpoena, subject to conditions. Comcast must notify the subscriber, who may challenge the subpoena or ask to proceed anonymously; the identifying information must remain protected, and Strike 3 may not publicly disclose it without the court’s permission.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 174.160.76.56 · No. 5:24-cv-00440
- Edward Davila
- Mar. 5, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that an unknown individual used BitTorrent to download and distribute about 24 of Strike 3’s copyrighted adult motion pictures. Strike 3 identified the activity through its infringement-detection system and associated it with IP address 174.160.76.56. The complaint asserted one claim for direct copyright infringement and sought an injunction and statutory damages.
Strike 3 asked for permission to serve a Rule 45 subpoena before the parties’ initial discovery conference. The subpoena would require Comcast Cable, a non-party internet service provider, to identify the person associated with the IP address by providing the person’s true name and address.
Good-Cause Analysis
The court applied the four-factor test generally used in the Northern District of California for early discovery aimed at identifying an unknown defendant:
- Strike 3 identified the Doe defendant with enough specificity for the court to determine that the defendant was a real person who could be sued in federal court. The complaint alleged that BitTorrent activity required a human user, and Strike 3 used geolocation technology to place the IP address within the district. - Strike 3 described its efforts to identify the person, including its technology, web searches, and consultations with computer investigators and cybersecurity experts. - The court found that Strike 3 had preliminarily shown its complaint could withstand a motion to dismiss. Accepting the allegations as true at this stage, the complaint alleged that Strike 3 owned the copyrights and that the defendant downloaded, copied, and distributed the films without permission. - The court found that the requested discovery was reasonably likely to identify the defendant because the internet service provider was the entity that could match the IP address to subscriber information.
The court therefore found good cause for expedited discovery. This ruling authorized an investigative step; it did not determine that the subscriber was the person who infringed Strike 3’s copyrights or otherwise resolve the copyright claim.
Privacy Protections and Conditions
The court also ordered protective measures because the subscriber might be innocent or unaware of the alleged activity. The court noted concerns that subscribers in similar cases could face pressure to settle quickly because of the nature of the allegations, the risk of public identification, or the cost of obtaining legal help. Strike 3 did not oppose procedural safeguards protecting privacy.
The order permits Strike 3 to serve Comcast with the subpoena and a copy of the order. Strike 3 may also serve the same type of subpoena on another internet service provider identified in Comcast’s response. If the provider is a qualifying cable operator, it must send the subscriber a copy of the order as required by federal law.
Within 30 days after being served by Strike 3, the provider must serve the Doe subscriber with the subpoena and the order. Within 30 days after receiving them, the subscriber may challenge the subpoena, including by asking the court to cancel or modify it, and may request permission to proceed under a pseudonym with personal identifying information filed under seal. If the subscriber does not challenge the subpoena within that period, the provider may produce the responsive information within 10 days.
Strike 3 may use the information only to protect and enforce the rights asserted in the complaint. It may not publicly disclose the information without the court’s permission, and references to the subscriber’s identity must be redacted and filed under seal until further order. The provider must preserve the subpoenaed information while any timely motion to dismiss is being resolved.
Disposition
Judge Edward J. Davila GRANTED Strike 3’s ex parte application with respect to the Doe defendant and authorized the third-party subpoena subject to the stated notice, challenge, confidentiality, and preservation requirements.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.