Curt Edmondson Joins The Torrent Defense Law Firm as Of Counsel

As of today, September 1, 2026, J. Curtis Edmondson is Of Counsel to my firm. If you have a Strike 3 Holdings case, this is good news for you, and I want to explain why in plain terms.

Who Curt is

Curt is a lawyer and an engineer. He holds bachelor's and master's degrees in electrical engineering, is a licensed professional engineer, and is a registered patent attorney. He is a member of the California, Washington, Oregon, and District of Columbia bars and is admitted to practice in federal trial and appellate courts across the country, including the Second, Ninth, and Federal Circuits. He has spent nearly a decade defending people accused in BitTorrent copyright cases, and he did it from the technical side first: taking apart the detection software these plaintiffs rely on and asking whether it proves what they say it proves.

The case Strike 3 does not want you to read about

In the Western District of Washington, Curt represented a retired police officer whom Strike 3 had sued as a John Doe. Instead of settling, his client counterclaimed for a declaration that he had not infringed. The court granted summary judgment for the defendant, finding that Strike 3 had produced no evidence that he had copied any of its films, and awarded him $47,777.26 in attorney's fees and costs under the Copyright Act. Strike 3 appealed. The Ninth Circuit affirmed. At oral argument, Strike 3 conceded it was nearly certain that someone else in the household had been the actual downloader. (Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, No. 2:17-cv-01731 (W.D. Wash.), aff'd, No. 20-35196 (9th Cir. Mar. 18, 2021).)

That case matters for two reasons. It is the outcome Strike 3's entire model is built to avoid: a court looking at the evidence and a defendant being paid instead of paying. And it was the first time Strike 3's detection technology was put under real forensic scrutiny by someone qualified to do it.

Curt is an experienced litigator beyond copyright, too. He recovered more than $4.5 million for a client from an operator of Los Angeles gentlemen's clubs over a mining deal on the Colorado River, and he defended a tech executive against a $27 million defamation claim brought by the executive's former mother-in-law in San Francisco — a defense verdict after a three-week jury trial.

Curt has done this before, too. In a Malibu Media case, his client recovered $108,000 in fees and costs, and Curt collected it.

We have already been working together

This is not a new partnership in practice, only on paper. Curt and I have been co-counsel on Strike 3 litigation for years:

• Middle District of Florida, No. 8:20-cv-00676. We litigated this one for more than three years, through discovery and pretrial, to a jury trial set to begin on July 17, 2023. Strike 3 settled the day before. (The docket runs to more than 250 entries; the terms are confidential.)
• District of Hawaii, No. 1:23-cv-00178-JAO-RT. Curt defended a John Doe subscriber, won the client the right to proceed anonymously over Strike 3's opposition, and the case resolved by confidential settlement at a court settlement conference. I supported the fee work.
• District of New Jersey, No. 2:24-cv-10059. Pending. We represent the defendant, and that is all I will say about an active case.

Very few lawyers in this country have taken Strike 3 to the eve of a jury trial. Fewer have won a fee award against Strike 3 that survived appeal. Between the two of us, we have done both, and we have been doing this work since 2011.

What changes for you

Wherever Strike 3 files. This is a federal practice. Between us we are admitted to federal district courts in Pennsylvania, New York, Colorado, California, Washington, Oregon, Michigan, and the District of Columbia, and we appear elsewhere pro hac vice with local counsel. Strike 3 files most heavily in California, New Jersey, New York, Florida, and Hawaii; we have appeared in all of them. Where you live does not change whether we can help you.

Two engineers. I have been a programmer since before I was a lawyer; Curt is a professional engineer. When Strike 3 says its software saw your IP address, we are the people who can read the logs, understand what a dynamic IP or a shared network means for that claim, and explain it to a judge.

The same flat fees, set by the stage of your case. Bringing Curt on does not make the firm more expensive. Fees start at $1,500 and are set by how far your case has gone when you hire us. If your case progresses, you will never pay more than if you had waited; you only pay the difference. Details are on the fees page.

A free option if you would rather wait. Most people who get an ISP notice are never named. Our Watch service monitors your case docket at no charge and tells you if anything happens, so you do not have to pay Strike 3 or a lawyer while you wait.

If you didn't do it, we start there. When a client is truthfully innocent, our first move is a sworn declaration asking Strike 3 to dismiss the case without payment. Sometimes that ends it. When it does not, it changes the conversation. And when the facts are strong and Strike 3 will not let go, we now have, in-house, the lawyer who has taken that fight all the way through a Ninth Circuit appeal.

What does not change

You still call and get me. Curt and I will divide the work by court and by what each case needs, and we will both be on the ones that go the distance. If you have watched Lawful Masses, you know how I explain these cases; you will be seeing Curt on the channel too.

If you have received a notice from your ISP or a letter from Strike 3, call or text (610) 466-5644, or schedule a free consultation. The first call costs nothing.

— Leonard

The cases described above are matters of public record; client identities are not disclosed.