Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe

Background

Strike 3 Holdings, LLC alleged that “John Doe,” identified only by Internet Protocol address 142.255.57.149, downloaded, copied, and distributed Strike 3’s copyrighted movies in violation of the Copyright Act. Strike 3 sought permission to serve a third-party subpoena on Spectrum, the internet service provider, to obtain the subscriber’s name and address, investigate the alleged infringement, and serve the defendant.

Court’s Analysis

The court applied the standard used for expedited discovery, meaning discovery allowed before the normal schedule when there is good cause. The court considered whether Strike 3 had made an initial showing of an actionable claim, whether the request was specific, whether other ways existed to obtain the information, whether the information was needed to advance the case, and the defendant’s privacy interests.

The court found that Strike 3 had made an initial showing of copyright infringement by describing its original copyrighted works and providing details about the alleged copying, including dates and times. The requested discovery was limited to the subscriber’s name and address associated with the target Internet Protocol address. The court also found that Strike 3 had no practical alternative for obtaining the information and could not serve or pursue the case without it. Although the allegations involved adult movies and could cause embarrassment, the court found that the subscriber had only a minimal privacy expectation in the transmission or distribution of copyrighted material. The protective procedures in the order would address some privacy concerns.

Ruling and Protective Procedures

The court granted Strike 3’s motion for leave to serve the subpoena on the internet service provider for John Doe’s name and address. Strike 3 was required to include the order and the attached “Notice to Defendant” with the subpoena. Strike 3 was not permitted to subpoena Doe’s phone number or email address.

The court also ordered that Doe may proceed anonymously unless the court later orders otherwise. Strike 3 could not begin settlement discussions before serving the complaint without the court’s permission, although it could participate if Doe initiated discussions.

The internet service provider had 60 days after service of the subpoena to notify Doe and provide Doe with the subpoena, the order, and the notice. Doe then had 60 days after receiving those materials to file a motion challenging the subpoena, including a motion to quash or modify it. The provider could not disclose Doe’s identifying information before that period ended, or while a timely challenge was pending. If no challenge was filed, the provider would have 10 additional days to produce the subpoenaed information.

The provider was required to preserve the information, confer with Strike 3 about production costs, and could not charge in advance. Any information disclosed could be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights described in the complaint. Strike 3’s deadline to serve the summons and complaint was extended to 45 days after receiving the information. Strike 3 also had to submit status letters to the court every 60 days until Doe answered or otherwise responded; the court stated that failing to submit them could result in dismissal for failure to prosecute. The clerk was directed to terminate Docket No. 8.

What the Order Did Not Decide

The order concerned discovery and anonymity. It did not decide whether John Doe actually infringed Strike 3’s copyrights or resolve the underlying copyright claims.