What this Miami-Dade County Court Lawsuit Means
On April 19, Strike 3 Holdings filed a case (2021-010651-CC-05), in Miami-Dade County Court, this time to ask for subpoenas for 176 internet subscribers from across the country from a variety of Internet Service Providers (ISPs). Based on IP address geolocation, these subscribers are likely from Florida, California, Connecticut, Michigan, Illinois, and Pennsylvania.
The ISPs targeted by the subpoenas include Antietam Broadband, Armstrong Cable, Atlantic Broadband, Cable One, Century Link, Clarksville Department of Electricity, Cox, Fuse, Google Fiber, Grande Communications, Hotwire Fision, Mediacom Cable, PenTeleData, Rise Broadband, Ritter Communications, Sonic, Suddenlink, TDS Telecom, Webpass, Wide Open West, and Windstream Communications. The only thing linking all the subscribers together is Strike 3’s claim that they recorded each IP address committing copyright infringement by downloading Vixen, Tushy, or Blacked branded films through BitTorrent networks.
How Can Strike 3 Sue So Many People from Across the Country, in Miami-Dade, Florida?
Strike 3 uses a lesser known type of complaint called a Bill of Pure Discovery. They allege that the only relief they’re looking for is discovery, that is, a subpoena to the ISP for the identities of the internet subscribers behind each IP address.
Once the court grants the subpoenas, the ISP is obligated to respond unless the defendant files a Motion to Quash (i.e., a motion to cancel the subpoena).
Once Strike 3 has the internet subscriber’s identity, they will usually sue an adult male in the household claiming that he must be the infringer. These Federal lawsuits are serious and can have damages of at least $750 per infringement. This can make a typical Strike 3 Holdings case worth $10,000s, if not $100,000s in damages. These cases shouldn’t be ignored.
Can I just Ignore This?
Many people who receive a notice from their ISP wonder whether Strike 3 is actually serious about filing Federal lawsuits against those who refuse to settle the case. Many hope that Strike 3 will ignore or forget about them. Unfortunately, Strike 3 is one of the most prolific copyright plaintiffs in Federal Courts. In 2020, they filed almost 900 Federal cases, largely representing people who refused to settle when the case was first filed in Miami-Dade. Although Strike 3 often treats these lawsuits as an opportunity to make money through quick settlements, they are also willing to follow through in Federal court.
Motions to Quash
Given the serious nature of the allegations, many defendants want to pursue a Motion to Quash. This is understandable, and there are some valid arguments that while the case remains in Florida county court, such as arguing that the court doesn’t have jurisdiction over copyright matters, nor over non-Florida residents. However, this might not be the end of the case, as Strike 3 frequently files Federal lawsuits against those that oppose the subpoena.
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 make sure that we can serve you, no matter where you are.
How I Can Help
The Plaintiff is often willing to settle or even dismiss the case when a defendant has an adequate defense. That’s why it’s so important to contact an experienced attorney right away. I can provide valuable information based on my years of experience fighting Strike 3. I work with a team of lawyers from across the country to help represent you, no matter where you are.
I’m happy to explain to you your options for defense and recommend the best way forward for your situation, whether it be watching and waiting, settling, a motion to quash, or a fighting in court. 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.
Yours,
Leonard French