Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Strike 3 Holdings, LLC filed this copyright infringement action on February 20, 2026, alleging that the defendant, identifiable only by IP address 108.204.120.235, used the BitTorrent protocol to download and distribute the plaintiff's adult films.
Because the plaintiff could not identify the defendant by name without the cooperation of the defendant's Internet Service Provider (ISP), it filed an ex parte application for leave to serve a third-party subpoena on the ISP prior to the Rule 26(f) discovery conference.
The plaintiff argued that without expedited discovery it would be unable to serve the complaint and vindicate its copyright.
The court evaluated the request under the Ninth Circuit's "good cause" standard for early discovery and considered the five-factor test from the Second Circuit's Arista Records decision to balance the plaintiff's need for discovery against the subscriber's privacy interests.
The Court’s Holding
The court granted the plaintiff's ex parte application for expedited discovery on specific terms.
It authorized the plaintiff to serve a subpoena on the ISP seeking only the true name and address of the subscriber assigned the IP address.
However, the order imposed significant privacy safeguards: the plaintiff is prohibited from formally serving the complaint or revealing the defendant's identity without further court order; the plaintiff must serve a copy of the order on the identified subscriber within ten days; and the court invited both parties to an informal conference to discuss a motion to quash and service procedures.
The court emphasized that an IP address identifies a location, not a specific user, and that the adult nature of the content heightened the risk of reputational harm and coercive settlement pressure on a potentially misidentified subscriber.
Key Takeaways
- Expedited discovery to unmask a Doe defendant via ISP subpoena was granted under the 'good cause' standard, but strictly limited to the subscriber's name and address.
- The court recognized a constitutional privacy interest in the ISP subscriber's identity, citing the tenuous link between an IP address subscriber and the actual infringer, especially in shared or wireless networks.
- The adult nature of the copyrighted works triggered heightened privacy concerns due to the risk of embarrassment, reputational damage, and coercive settlements against potentially innocent subscribers.
- The plaintiff is barred from formal service or public disclosure of the defendant's identity until further court order, and must notify the identified subscriber of the lawsuit and this order within 10 days.
- The court established a voluntary informal conference procedure to allow the potential defendant to move to quash the subpoena before formal litigation proceeds.
Why It Matters
This order reflects a growing judicial trend in BitTorrent copyright cases—particularly those involving adult content—to condition expedited discovery on robust procedural safeguards for unnamed subscribers.
By recognizing that an IP address does not reliably identify the individual infringer and that the stigma of adult content litigation creates unique risks of coercion, the court balanced the plaintiff's right to pursue its claims with the subscriber's First and Fourth Amendment privacy interests.
The mandatory notification requirement and the voluntary pre-service conference mechanism serve as a model for protecting due process rights in high-volume copyright enforcement actions.
The order also creates a staged process before the subscriber is publicly named. The ISP must preserve identifying records, notify the subscriber, and withhold production during the objection period. Any subpoena challenge may be filed anonymously, and the plaintiff may not publicly reveal the identified person without later court permission.
The subscriber is not automatically treated as the infringer merely because the account was assigned the observed IP address. The court’s conference procedure preserves room to contest identification, seek to quash the subpoena, discuss service, or explore resolution before ordinary litigation begins.