Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe subscriber assigned IP address 66.41.212.105
- Patrick Schiltz
- 0:23-cv-03267
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 18
In Strike 3 Holdings v. John Doe, Judge Foster granted early discovery, allowing a subpoena for the subscriber’s name and address.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may obtain limited identifying information about the John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 66.41.212.105 from the subscriber’s internet service provider. The subscriber receives notice and an opportunity to seek a protective order or permission to proceed anonymously; the provider must follow the order’s notice and production limits.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe subscriber assigned IP address 66.41.212.105, Strike 3 alleged that the unidentified subscriber used BitTorrent to download and distribute its copyrighted movies. Strike 3 asked to subpoena the subscriber’s internet service provider before the parties held their required discovery conference.
The court found good cause for early discovery because Strike 3 had stated a copyright-infringement claim, requested only the subscriber’s name and address, lacked another way to identify the defendant, and could not proceed without that information. The court also recognized that the subscriber might not be the infringer and imposed privacy protections.
The court granted Strike 3’s motion, as Judge Foster ordered for this case and the other cases covered by the omnibus order. The subpoena may seek only the subscriber’s name and address, and the provider must notify the subscriber, who may seek protection or ask to proceed anonymously.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe subscriber assigned IP address 66.41.212.105 · No. 0:23-cv-03267
- Patrick Schiltz
- Dec. 6, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed twenty-one similar cases against unidentified John Doe defendants. In this case, Strike 3 alleged that the subscriber assigned IP address 66.41.212.105 used the BitTorrent file-distribution protocol to download and distribute Strike 3’s copyrighted movies without authorization. Strike 3 said its infringement-detection system identified the IP address, but that the internet service provider was the only party able to connect the address to a person’s name and address.
Strike 3 sought permission to serve a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 subpoena on the provider before the parties held the conference ordinarily required by Rule 26(f). It asked for limited discovery to identify the subscriber, investigate the alleged infringement, and serve the defendant.
Court’s analysis
The court applied the “good cause” standard commonly used in the District of Minnesota for expedited discovery, meaning that the need for immediate discovery must outweigh prejudice to the responding party. It considered five factors: whether Strike 3 showed a concrete preliminary claim, whether its request was specific, whether other ways existed to obtain the information, whether the information was needed for the case to proceed, and the subscriber’s privacy expectations.
The court concluded that early discovery was warranted. It found that Strike 3 had sufficiently alleged a copyright-infringement claim by alleging ownership of valid copyrights, unauthorized copying and distribution, and the defendants’ involvement. The request was limited to the subscriber’s name and address; the court found no alternative means to obtain that information; and the cases could not proceed without identifying the defendants. The court also found that Strike 3’s interest in pursuing its copyright claims outweighed the subscribers’ privacy interests, provided that privacy protections were imposed.
Ruling
The court granted Strike 3’s motion in this case. It authorized Strike 3 to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on the internet service provider seeking only the name and address of the subscriber assigned to IP address 66.41.212.105 during the periods of alleged infringement identified in the complaint.
The order requires at least sixty days’ notice before production, limits the subpoena to one category of documents identifying the subscriber, and permits the provider to seek a protective order. The provider must notify the subscriber within fourteen days after receiving the subpoena. The subscriber then has forty-five days from notice to seek a protective order, file a responsive pleading, or both.
Strike 3 must provide the order with the subpoena, and the provider must provide it to the subscriber with the required notice. No other discovery was authorized at that time. Strike 3 may not publicly disclose information produced in response to the subpoena until the subscriber has had an opportunity to ask to proceed anonymously and the court has ruled on that request. Judge Dulce J. Foster also ordered Strike 3 to file a status report in each covered case by the date stated in the order.
Read the full 18-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.