hotwire

June 28, 2021 by Leonard J. French

Strike 3 Holdings Subpoenas Identities of 75 Internet Subscribers

What this Miami-Dade County Court Lawsuit Means

On May 24, 2021, Strike 3 Holdings filed a case (2021-016035-CC-05), in Miami-Dade County Court, to ask for subpoenas for 75 internet subscribers from various internet services (i.e., Google Fiber, Hotwire, Optimum Online, RCN, Sonic.net, and Webpass). Based on IP address geolocation, these subscribers are likely from all over the country, including Texas, California, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Florida, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Illinois (among others). Strike 3 claims 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 internet service provider for the identities of the internet subscribers behind each IP address.

Once the court grants the subpoenas, the ISP (e.g., Google fiber, Hotwire, Optimum Online, RCN, etc.) 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 focusing on 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 while the case remains in Florida county court, such as 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.

October 12, 2020 by Leonard J. French

Strike 3 Continues to File Federal Lawsuits Across the Country

Strike 3 Holdings is one of the most prolific filers of copyright infringement cases, requesting thousands of identities of anonymous internet subscribers through subpoenas to internet service providers (e.g., Atlantic Broadband, Comcast, Cox, Charter, Frontier, Spectrum, RCN, etc.). They claim their investigators have observed various IP addresses downloading Strike 3’s films (marketed under the Tushy, Vixen, and Blacked brands) through BitTorrent networks.

However, filing a Federal lawsuit against each subscriber is costly. Recently, they’ve started to request dozens – sometimes more than 100 – identities at a time using a Bill of Pure Discovery, filed in Miami-Dade Florida. Many people first find out about the case when they receive a notice of the subpoena through their ISP, and are told about a Motion to Quash. This is a a type of motion to cancel or “quash” the subpoena. The case for a Motion to Quash is strong in Florida, particularly because state courts do not have jurisdiction over copyright matters, and because most of the subscribers are not Florida residents.

Strike 3 has typically dismissed the case against anyone who files a Motion to Quash in Florida state court, but it appears this is only a temporary reprieve, as they are now filing dozens of Federal lawsuits, including against people who were dismissed from a former Miami-Dade lawsuit.

Strike 3 has already filed 23 Federal cases in October alone, meaning they’re filing an average of 2 per day. They’ve filed across the country, including California (8 cases), Illinois (1 case), Florida (3 cases), Maryland (9 cases), Michigan (1 case), and New York (1 case).

The argument for a Motion to Quash is more complex in Federal cases as the case is often filed in the correct jurisdiction. 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 potentially be harmful. I work with a team of lawyers across the country to provide the best defense, no matter where you are.

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 may even dismiss the case when a defendant puts up 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 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.

October 4, 2020 by Leonard J. French

Strike 3 Seeks Almost 150 Identities in Florida Case

Strike 3 Holdings is at it again, this time requesting nearly 150 identities through an obscure type of lawsuit called a Bill of Pure Discovery in Florida’s Miami-Dade County Court. Strike 3 argues that their investigators have captured a list of IP addresses that were observed downloading their films (branded under Vixen, Tushy, and Blacked) through BitTorrent networks. They then ask the court to provide a subpoena for the internet service provider (e.g., Atlantic Broadband, Cox, Frontier, Hotwire, Optimum Online, PenTeleData, RCN, San Bruno Cable, Webpass, Ziply Fiber, etc.) to provide the name of the subscriber behind the IP address. They then make the leap that the subscriber must be the copyright infringer and sue the subscriber in Federal court.

Although the lawsuit was filed in Florida, only a minority (22 IP addresses) are actually geolocated to Florida. The rest are from across the country, including New York (31), Arizona (20), California (20), Nevada (11), Massachusetts (8), Texas (7), New Jersey (6), Connecticut (5), Virginia (4), Illinois (4), Pennsylvania (2), Washington, DC (2), Colorado (2), Maryland (1), Nebraska (1), and Washington (1). I’ve represented people from across the country, am admitted to several Federal courts, and have a network of local counsel to help.

However, don’t let the number of defendants make you think that Strike 3 may forget about you. They are notoriously aggressive in pursuing each case, and each allegation is serious. IP addresses in this case are linked to between 24 and 205 infringements. 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”. Thus, the cases listed here could reasonably be worth between more than $54,000 to more than $460,000 in statutory damages. However, the Plaintiff is often willing to settle for less or may even dismiss the case when a defendant puts up an adequate defense.

Many subscribers first learn about the lawsuit when they’re notified through their ISP, which often mention Motions to Quash. When cases are filed in Florida’s county court, it’s possible to argue that the court doesn’t have subject matter jurisdiction (as copyright is supposed to be handled in Federal courts). For non-Florida residents, we can also argue that there’s no personal jurisdiction either.

However, Strike 3 routinely refiles their case against defendants in the correct Federal court and asks for the subpoena information again. This means that for some, a Motion to Quash is just a delaying tactic and doesn’t bring an end to the case. If you’re considering a Motion to Quash, please contact me so I can explain in which circumstances I advise it and when I believe it will actually cost you more.