BitTorrent Subpoena & Lawsuit Defense

Call or Text Now

610-466-5644

copyright

by

Strike 3 Holdings Files 18 New Federal Lawsuits Across the Country

Strike 3 Holdings, one of the most prolific copyright Plaintiffs in the country, has filed 18 new Federal copyright lawsuits in Illinois (4 cases), Michigan (2 cases), New York (11 cases), and Pennsylvania (1 case), in only a matter of days. Each lawsuit is nearly identical, alleging that their investigators observed an IP address downloading Vixen, Tushy, or Blacked films through BitTorrent networks. They then allege that the internet subscriber associated with the IP address must be the alleged John Doe infringer. They then request a subpoena for subscriber’s identity from the Internet Service Provider (e.g., AT&T, Comcast, Cox, Spectrum, Verizon, etc.). 

The argument that the person that pays the internet bill must also be the copyright infringer is weak, as other people may have had access to the internet connection (for example). Yet, the barebones accusation that the subscriber is responsible is usually enough for Federal judges to grant the subpoena. Strike 3 Holdings has weaponized this process to try to extract the largest settlements they can from internet subscribers and they are notoriously aggressive.

The Plaintiff sees each infringement as worth at least $750 in statutory copyright damages, 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. That’s why it’s so important to contact an experienced attorney right away.

Many people discover the lawsuit after they receive a notice from their ISP, which advises them that the only way to fight the subpoena is through a Motion to Quash (i.e., a motion to cancel or “quash” the subpoena). In fact, many of these cases started out in county court in Miami-Dade, Florida, where people have had success in being dismissed from their case after filing a Motion to Quash. However, Motions to Quash in Federal cases are not as simple, as Strike 3 usually files in the correct jurisdiction, leaving fewer arguments against 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 provide the best defense, regardless of the state you live in.

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.

[Read more…] about Strike 3 Holdings Files 18 New Federal Lawsuits Across the Country

by

Strike 3 Holdings Files 23 Cases in Virginia in a Single Day

Strike 3 Holdings, one of the most prolific copyright Plaintiffs in the country, has filed 24 new Federal copyright lawsuits in Virginia, 23 of which were filed on the same day. For any other Plaintiff, this would be a substantial undertaking, but this is normal for Strike 3 Holdings. Each lawsuit is nearly identical, alleging that their investigators observed an IP address committing copyright infringement by downloading Vixen, Tushy, or Blacked films through BitTorrent networks. They then allege that the John Doe internet subscriber behind the IP address must be the alleged infringer, and subpoena the identity from the Internet Service Provider (e.g., AT&T, Comcast, Cox, Spectrum, Verizon, etc.). Virginia is a favorite target for Strike 3, as they often target the cities with a higher than average income, hoping to secure large settlements.

The argument that the person that pays the internet bill must also be the copyright infringer is weak. For example, other people may have had access to the internet through unsecured wifi routers. Yet, the barebones accusation that the subscriber is responsible is usually enough for Federal judges to grant the subpoena. Strike 3 Holdings has weaponized this process to try to extract the largest settlements they can from internet subscribers.

Many people discover the lawsuit after they receive a notice from their ISP, which advises them that the only way to fight the subpoena is through a Motion to Quash (i.e., a motion to cancel or “quash” the subpoena). In fact, many of these cases started out in county court in Miami-Dade, Florida, where people have had success in being dismissed after filing a Motion to Quash. However, Motions to Quash in Federal cases are more complicated, as Strike 3 usually files in the correct jurisdiction, leaving fewer arguments against 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 legal team 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.

[Read more…] about Strike 3 Holdings Files 23 Cases in Virginia in a Single Day

by

Strike 3 Holdings Demands Identities of 39 Internet Subscribers from Across the Country

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.

[Read more…] about Strike 3 Holdings Demands Identities of 39 Internet Subscribers from Across the Country