Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe
- Nelson Roman
- 7:24-cv-00652
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Strike 3 Holdings v. Doe, Judge Roman granted leave for a third-party subpoena to identify the Doe defendant in a copyright case.
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC may pursue early third-party discovery intended to identify the Doe defendant through information held by Optimum Online. The unidentified subscriber may be affected by that discovery, but the order does not identify the subscriber or decide liability.
What happened
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued an unidentified internet subscriber, known as Doe, alleging that the subscriber used the BitTorrent network to infringe its copyrighted works. Strike 3 said it knew only the subscriber’s internet protocol address and sought information from internet service provider Optimum Online to learn the defendant’s identity.
The plaintiff asked to obtain that information before the parties’ required early discovery conference. It argued that the information was essential, that the request would be specific, that no other way existed to identify Doe, and that the subscriber had only a limited expectation of privacy in the alleged conduct.
The court granted Strike 3 Holdings leave to file a motion to serve a third-party subpoena and directed the Clerk to terminate the motion at ECF No. 6. Judge Nelson S. Roman’s order did not decide whether copyright infringement occurred, and the text does not expressly state a ruling on the request to postpone the scheduling conference.
The detailed version
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe · No. 7:24-cv-00652
- Nelson Roman
- Feb. 15, 2024
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC brought the case against a John Doe defendant whose name and address were not known. The plaintiff alleged that the internet protocol address assigned to Doe had been used to infringe Strike 3’s copyrighted works through the BitTorrent file-distribution network. Strike 3 stated that it owned three subscription-based adult websites and the copyrights to the movies distributed through those websites.
Requested discovery
Strike 3 asked for permission under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d)(1) to seek early discovery before the parties held the required Rule 26(f) conference. Specifically, it sought to serve a third-party subpoena on Optimum Online, the internet service provider associated with the relevant internet protocol address, to obtain information identifying Doe. The plaintiff also requested that any initial scheduling conference be postponed until Doe was identified and served.
Strike 3 argued that early discovery was justified because it would present a preliminary showing of copyright infringement, make a specific request, show that the information was central and unavailable through other means, and establish that Doe had only a limited expectation of privacy in the alleged transmission or distribution of copyrighted material. These were arguments made by the plaintiff; the opinion does not describe a merits determination on them.
Ruling
The court granted the plaintiff leave to file a motion to serve a third-party subpoena. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 6. The order does not state that the court decided whether Doe infringed copyright, and the text does not expressly state how the request to postpone the Rule 16 scheduling conference was resolved.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.