Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Alvin Hellerstein
- 1:23-cv-04364
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 9
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Magistrate Judge Aaron allowed limited discovery to identify the anonymous defendant while protecting the defendant’s privacy.
Strike 3 Holdings may seek John Doe’s name and address from the internet service provider, but only under the court’s privacy protections. John Doe may remain anonymous and may challenge the subpoena within the specified period. The internet service provider must preserve the information and withhold disclosure while a timely challenge is pending.
What happened
In Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, Strike 3 asked to subpoena the defendant’s internet provider before the usual early-case conference. Strike 3 said that the internet address had been used to infringe its copyrights and sought the subscriber’s name and address.
The court found that Strike 3 had shown a preliminary copyright-infringement claim, requested limited information, lacked another apparent way to identify the alleged infringer, and needed the information to pursue the case. But the court also recognized privacy concerns and the possibility that the internet provider could identify the wrong person.
Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron granted the motion subject to safeguards. The defendant could remain anonymous, Strike 3 could seek only the defendant’s name and address, and the defendant or internet provider would have 60 days to challenge the subpoena before information could be disclosed. The court also granted Strike 3’s request to extend the service deadline to October 21, 2023.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 1:23-cv-04364
- Alvin Hellerstein
- Aug. 24, 2023
Background
Strike 3 Holdings filed an ex parte motion, meaning without first notifying the opposing party, for permission to serve a third-party subpoena on Spectrum, the defendant’s internet service provider. Strike 3 sought the name and address associated with Internet Protocol (IP) address 158.222.143.3, which it alleged had been used to infringe its copyrights. The request came before the conference normally required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f).
Court’s Analysis
The court found good cause for early discovery. It concluded that Strike 3 had made a prima facie claim of copyright infringement, meaning a claim sufficiently supported at this stage; sought only the specific information needed to identify John Doe; appeared to have no alternative means of obtaining that identity; and needed the information to advance its claim.
The court also found substantial privacy concerns because of the nature of the copyrighted material and the possibility that the internet provider could falsely identify a subscriber. The order therefore permitted the subpoena only with protections for the anonymous defendant.
Order
The court granted Strike 3’s motion subject to several conditions. Strike 3 could not begin settlement discussions before serving the complaint without the court’s permission, unless the defendant initiated those discussions. John Doe could proceed anonymously unless the court later ordered otherwise.
Within 14 days, Strike 3 could serve a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 subpoena seeking only the defendant’s name and address. It could not seek a telephone number or email address. The subpoena and the court’s notice had to be provided to the internet service provider.
The provider had 60 days after receiving the subpoena and order to notify the defendant. The defendant then had 60 days to file a motion challenging, quashing, or modifying the subpoena. The provider could not disclose information during that period or while a timely challenge remained unresolved. If no challenge was filed, the provider had 10 additional days to produce the requested information and had to preserve the information while any timely challenge was pending.
Any information disclosed could be used only to protect Strike 3’s rights stated in the complaint. The court also granted Strike 3’s request to extend the deadline for serving the complaint to October 21, 2023, and directed Strike 3 to file a status letter on November 22, 2023. The order authorized limited discovery; it did not decide whether John Doe infringed Strike 3’s copyrights.
Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.