Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:21-cv-08227
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 7
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Abrams allowed early discovery to identify an anonymous defendant accused of copyright infringement.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may subpoena Verizon Fios for John Doe’s name and address. John Doe may challenge or seek to limit the subpoena or request anonymity, and Verizon Fios must follow the court’s notice, preservation, and disclosure procedures.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe, identified only by Internet Protocol address, alleging that Doe downloaded and distributed its adult motion pictures through BitTorrent. Strike 3 asked to obtain Doe’s name and address from internet provider Verizon Fios before the parties’ usual discovery conference.
The court found that all five factors favored early discovery: Strike 3 had made an initial showing of copyright infringement, requested only narrow identifying information, had no other stated way to identify Doe, needed the information to serve Doe and continue the case, and faced only a limited privacy interest in the sharing of copyrighted material.
Judge Ronnie Abrams granted Strike 3’s motion. She authorized a subpoena for Doe’s true name and current and permanent address, but not email addresses or telephone numbers, and required notices and protections allowing Doe to challenge the subpoena or seek anonymity.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:21-cv-08227
- Ronnie Abrams
- Oct. 15, 2021
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that John Doe had infringed its copyrights by downloading and distributing its adult motion pictures through the BitTorrent file-sharing network. Strike 3 identified Doe only through Internet Protocol address 74.108.115.131. It asked for permission to serve an early subpoena on Verizon Fios, the internet service provider associated with the address, to obtain Doe’s name and address.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) generally prevents discovery before the parties confer about a discovery plan, unless the court authorizes it. The court applied a flexible reasonableness-and-good-cause standard and considered five factors: whether Strike 3 had made an initial showing of infringement; whether the requested discovery was specific; whether other ways existed to obtain the information; whether the information was needed to advance the case; and Doe’s expectation of privacy.
Court’s analysis
The court found that each factor favored Strike 3:
- Strike 3 made an initial showing of copyright infringement by identifying the copyrighted works, their publication and registration information, and its allegation that a proprietary system called “VXN Scan” detected Doe downloading and distributing the works. - The requested information was narrow because Strike 3 sought only Doe’s name and address. - Strike 3 stated that Verizon Fios was the only entity able to connect the Internet Protocol address to the subscriber and identify Doe. - Without the information, Strike 3 would be unable to serve Doe and continue the case. - Although identification could cause embarrassment because the case involved adult movies, the court said internet subscribers have a minimal expectation of privacy when sharing copyrighted material.
Ruling and protections
The court granted Strike 3’s motion. It authorized Strike 3 to immediately serve Verizon Fios with a subpoena under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 seeking Doe’s true name and current and permanent address. The subpoena could not seek Doe’s email addresses or telephone numbers.
The court also ordered Verizon Fios to notify Doe within 60 days after receiving the subpoena. If neither Doe nor Verizon Fios challenged the subpoena during that period, Verizon Fios would have 10 days to provide the responsive information to Strike 3. Doe could move to cancel or modify the subpoena or seek to proceed anonymously; if Doe did so, Verizon Fios could not release the contact information until the court ruled. The court required preservation of the information, prohibited advance charges by Verizon Fios, limited use of any disclosed information to protecting Strike 3’s rights in the lawsuit, and adjourned the initial conference without setting a new date. The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.