BitTorrent Subpoena & Lawsuit Defense

Call or Text Now

610-466-5644

cox

by

5 New Federal Strike 3 Holdings Cases in New Jersey

Strike 3 Holdings has filed 5 new Federal copyright lawsuits in New Jersey in one day! Typically, this would be a daunting task for a Plaintiff, but Strike 3 isn’t typical. They’re one of the most prolific copyright Plaintiffs in the country. Each lawsuit is nearly identical, alleging that their investigators observed an IP address downloading Vixen, Tushy, or Blacked films through BitTorrent networks. They accuse the internet subscriber associated with the IP address as being the copyright infringer, and subpoena the Internet Service Provider (e.g., AT&T, Comcast, Cox, Spectrum, Optimum Online, RCN, Verizon, etc.) for the subscriber’s identity.

The argument that the person that pays the internet bill must also be the copyright infringer is weak. Other people may have had access to the internet connection, including guests, other family members, and unauthorized users. Yet, this barebones accusation is usually enough for Federal judges. Strike 3 Holdings has weaponized the copyright act to try to extract the largest settlements they can from internet subscribers, and they are notoriously aggressive.

That’s because this 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. The Plaintiff also targets wealthier neighborhoods, hoping to ensnare people who can secure substantial settlements. 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. I can provide valuable information based on my years of experience with Strike 3, help develop the best defense strategy for your situation, and help you reach a resolution.

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 the subpoena). In fact, many of these cases started out in county court in Miami-Dade, Florida, where people have been 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.

I’m happy to explain to you 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 5 New Federal Strike 3 Holdings Cases in New Jersey

by

Strike 3 Holdings Files 25 New Copyright Cases in California in One Day!

Strike 3 Holdings has filed 25 new Federal copyright lawsuits in California in one day! Typically, this would be a daunting task for a Plaintiff, but Strike 3 is not typical. They’re one of the most prolific copyright Plaintiffs in the country. Each lawsuit is nearly identical, alleging that their investigators observed an IP address downloading Vixen, Tushy, or Blacked films through BitTorrent networks. They then accuse the internet subscriber associated with the IP address as being the copyright infringer and subpoena the Internet Service Provider (e.g., AT&T, Comcast, Cox, Spectrum, Verizon, etc.) for the subscriber’s identity.

The argument that the person that pays the internet bill must also be the copyright infringer is weak. Other people may have had access to the internet connection, including guests, other family members, and unauthorized users. Yet, the barebones accusation that the subscriber is responsible is often enough for Federal judges. Strike 3 Holdings has weaponized this process to try to extract the largest settlements they can from internet subscribers, and they are notoriously aggressive.

That’s because this 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. The Plaintiff also targets wealthier neighborhoods, hoping to ensnare people who can secure substantial settlements. 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 25 New Copyright Cases in California in One Day!

by

Strike 3 Holdings Files 8 New Cases in California

Strike 3 Holdings has filed 18 new Federal copyright lawsuits in California in less than a week. Normally, this would be daunting, but this is normal for Strike 3, one of the most prolific copyright Plaintiffs in the country. Each lawsuit is nearly identical, alleging that their investigators observed an IP address downloading Vixen, Tushy, or Blacked films through BitTorrent networks. They then accuse the internet subscriber associated with the IP address as being the copyright infringer and subpoena the Internet Service Provider (e.g., AT&T, Comcast, Cox, Spectrum, Verizon, etc.) for the subscriber’s identity.

The argument that the person that pays the internet bill must also be the copyright infringer is weak. Other people may have had access to the internet connection, including guests, other family members, and unauthorized users. Yet, the barebones accusation that the subscriber is responsible is often enough for Federal judges. 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 8 New Cases in California