Strike 3 Holdings, one of the most prolific copyright Plaintiffs in the country, has filed a lawsuit in Miami-Dade County Court demanding subpoenas to find out the identity of 39 internet subscribers (Case 2020-025803-CC-05, filed November 2, 2020). They allege that an investigator observed the IP addresses downloading Strike 3 films, marketed under the brands Tushy, Vixen, and Blacked, through BitTorrent networks. The IP addresses of the subscribers have been geolocated to California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, and Texas. Strike 3 has also alleged that the internet subscriber associated with each IP address must be the alleged copyright infringer.
This is a tenuous argument at best, as there are many reasons why the subscriber might not be the infringer (e.g., someone else had access to the internet connection or the wifi was left unprotected). However, Miami-Dade county court judges routinely grant subpoenas to force internet service providers, like Cox, Frontier, Optimum Online, RCN, and Webpass, to reveal the name of the accused internet subscriber.
It is possible to fight the subpoena through a Motion to Quash (i.e., a motion to cancel or “quash” the subpoena) because the case was filed in a state court, which lacks jurisdiction over copyright matters and non-Florida residents. However, that may not be the end of the case, as Strike 3 routinely files federal lawsuits against those that fight the subpoena. These federal cases are often in the right jurisdiction, making another motion to quash complicated.
If you’re considering a Motion to Quash, please contact me. I’ve defended over 1,000 people against plaintiffs like Strike 3 Holdings and have significant experience with Motions to Quash. I can help explain when they can be helpful and when they could be potentially harmful. I work with a team of lawyers from across the country to provide the best defense, regardless of the state you live in.
Strike 3 Holdings is notoriously aggressive in pursuing each case, and each allegation is serious. The Plaintiff sees each infringement as worth at least $750, which they often ask to treble to $2,250 for what they see as “willful infringement”. Strike 3 Holdings cases, if lost in court, could easily cost $10,000s, or even $100,000s. However, the Plaintiff is often willing to settle for less or even dismiss the case when a defendant has an adequate defense. This is why it’s so important to contact an experienced attorney right away.
If you’ve received a notice from your internet service provider, please contact me. I can explain your options for defense and recommend the best way forward for your situation. I’ve represented more than 1,000 people across the country, and I focus my practice on defending against BitTorrent based lawsuits. I’m very familiar with this Plaintiff and can give you individualized guidance for your case.
I have years of experience defending file-sharing lawsuits and can help you achieve the best outcome possible. I have defeated several copyright plaintiffs in lawsuits around the U.S.; I also fought Malibu Media (i.e., the Plaintiff Strike 3 Holdings based their strategy on) in their first trial. I’ve represented over 1,000 defendants in both settling and litigating file-sharing lawsuits. I’ve written a subpoena defense guide for your information, as well. I’m happy to represent clients for both negotiating a settlement and fighting the case in court.
I understand most people haven’t prepared for large, unexpected legal expenses and strive to respect clients’ time and money. I offer flat fees for negotiating settlements to give my clients certainty. I’ve also represented lower income clients both in negotiations and in court, and will do my best to work within your means. I’m happy to speak with you to help advise you on what strategy is best in your situation.
I look forward to speaking with you and helping you put this matter behind you.