Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:23-cv-05435
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Caproni granted a limited subpoena request to identify an anonymous copyright defendant, with privacy protections.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may obtain limited identifying information through a subpoena. John Doe may remain anonymous and may challenge the subpoena before Spectrum discloses information. Spectrum must provide notice, preserve the information, and follow the order’s disclosure procedures.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued John Doe for alleged copyright infringement, identifying the defendant only through an Internet Protocol address. Strike 3 asked to subpoena the defendant’s Internet service provider, Spectrum, before the required conference between the parties so it could learn the defendant’s name and address.
The court allowed the subpoena but imposed protections for the defendant’s privacy. The subpoena may seek only the defendant’s name and address, not a telephone number or email address. The defendant may remain anonymous, will receive notice, and will have 60 days to challenge the subpoena before Spectrum may disclose any information.
Judge Valerie Caproni granted Strike 3’s motion subject to those protections, extended the deadline to serve the summons and complaint to October 13, 2023, and directed Strike 3 to file a status letter by that date.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:23-cv-05435
- Valerie Caproni
- July 26, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC brought a copyright-infringement action against John Doe, who was identified only by the alleged Internet Protocol address 72.225.198.202. Strike 3 moved for permission to serve a subpoena on the defendant’s Internet service provider, Spectrum, before the parties’ required Rule 26(f) conference. The subpoena sought the name and address associated with the Internet Protocol address.
Court’s analysis
The court concluded that Strike 3 had shown good cause for early discovery. It found that the requested name and address were a limited set of specific facts needed to pursue the case. The court also identified substantial privacy concerns because of the nature of the copyrighted material and the possibility that the provider could identify the wrong person.
Order
The court granted Strike 3’s motion subject to a protective order. John Doe may proceed anonymously unless the court orders otherwise. Strike 3 may immediately serve a Rule 45 subpoena on Spectrum seeking only the defendant’s name and address. It may not seek the defendant’s telephone number or email address through that subpoena.
Spectrum must notify the defendant and provide copies of the subpoena, the order, and the attached notice. The defendant has 60 days after receiving notice to challenge the subpoena, including by asking the court to cancel or change it. Spectrum may not disclose the information during that period or while a timely challenge is pending. If no challenge is filed, Spectrum has 10 days after the 60-day period ends to provide the requested information.
The order also requires Spectrum to preserve the subpoenaed information, prohibits advance charges for producing the information, and limits Strike 3’s use of any information disclosed to protecting its rights in the complaint. The court extended Strike 3’s deadline to serve the summons and complaint to October 13, 2023, required a status letter by that date, and directed the clerk to close the pending motion.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.