washington DC

November 6, 2020 by Leonard J. French

Strike 3 Holdings Demands Identities of 77 Comcast Internet Subscribers

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 77 Comcast internet subscribers (Case 2020-025801-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. These subscribers are from across the country, including California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Washington, DC. Strike 3 has 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 Comcast, 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 as 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.

November 4, 2020 by Leonard J. French

Strike 3 Holdings Files Even More Lawsuits in Washington, D.C., Illinois, and Michigan

Strike 3 Holdings, one of the most prolific copyright Plaintiffs in the country, has filed 9 more federal copyright lawsuits in Washington, DC (2 cases), Illinois (1 case), and Michigan (6 cases), in less than a week. One reason Strike 3 can file so many cases is that each case is nearly identical, except for the individual IP address and details of the alleged infringements.

They allege that an investigator observed an IP address downloading their films (marketed under the brands Tushy, Vixen, and Blacked) through BitTorrent networks. They then allege the internet subscriber associated with the IP address must be the alleged 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, such as a guest or through unprotected wifi). However, federal judges routinely grant subpoenas to force internet service providers (e.g., AT&T, Comcast, RCN, etc.) to reveal the name of the accused internet subscriber.

Many of these Federal cases first began in county court in Miami-Dade, Florida, where Strike 3 first made these allegations and asked for a subpoena. Many people haven chosen to fight that subpoena using a Motion to Quash (i.e., a motion to cancel or “quash” the subpoena) because the case was filed in a court that lacked jurisdiction over copyright matters and non-Florida residents. Strike 3 routinely dismisses these people from the Florida-based case; however, the case is rarely over, as Strike 3 goes on to file a Federal case in what is likely the correct jurisdiction, which makes filing a Motion to Quash more complex.

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.

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.

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.

September 30, 2020 by Leonard J. French

Strike 3 Holdings Files Almost 140 Federal Cases in September

Strike 3 Holdings, one of the most prolific filers of copyright infringement cases, has been increasing the rate they file Federal copyright complaints, filing 139 in September alone. The cases are spread across the country, including California (13 cases), the District of Columbia (2 cases), Maryland (21 cases), New Jersey (18 cases), New York (54 cases), Pennsylvania (16 cases), and Virginia (15 cases).

The reason they can file so quickly is because each case is nearly identical. Strike 3 alleges that their investigators have recorded an IP address downloading Vixen, Tushy, and/or Blacked films through BitTorrent networks, and are now suing the internet subscribers for copyright infringement. The usually sue for dozens of infringements, with each worth a minimum of $750 in damages, which the Plaintiff can argue should be tripled for “willful” infringement. Even if only granted minimal damages, a defendant could be liable for tens of thousands of dollars if they don’t mount an effective defense.

Many of these cases represent an internet subscriber that has fought against Strike 3’s original subpoena in Miami-Dade county court through a Motion to Quash. Although Strike 3 initially dismisses this defendant from their complaint, they soon file a lawsuit in Federal court for a second subpoena. This time, the case is usually filed in the correct court, making another Motion to Quash a more complicated matter.

Strike 3 is notoriously aggressive in their pursuit of these cases. If you’ve received a notice from your internet service provider, such as Comcast, Frontier Communications, Optimum Online, RCN, Spectrum, or Webpass, please contact me. I can explain your options for defense and recommend the best way forward for your situation.

August 30, 2020 by Leonard J. French

Strike 3 Holdings Demands Nearly 600 Identities in August

Strike 3 Holdings continues to barrage the Miami-Dade county court with requests for subpoenas for the identities of internet subscribers they claim have downloaded their films through BitTorrent networks. Strike 3 Holdings owns the brands Vixen, Tushy, and Blacked. In August alone, they filed 6 complaints (called Bills of Pure Discovery) and listed 593 IP addresses from a variety of internet service providers from across the country, including AT&T U-verse, Comcast, Frontier Communications, Optimum Online, RCN, Spectrum, and Webpass. Almost half of the IP addresses listed are from California (285), with a mixture of defendants from Connecticut (15), Washington, DC (11), Florida (18), Illinois (36), Maryland (26), Michigan (29), New Jersey (46), New York (101), Pennsylvania (20), and Virginia (6).

These subpoenas are serious and the first step in initiating a Federal lawsuit. Typically Strike 3 Holdings has investigators that monitor an IP address for months or even years, documenting every BitTorrent download. They typically wait until enough infringements have accrued from an IP address to be worth significant damages. In August, the number of alleged infringements ranged from 24 to 342. The Plaintiff sees each infringement as worth $750 in statutory damages, although they may ask the court for more to punish “willful” infringement. If they win in court, they may also be awarded attorneys’ fees and court costs, which further adds to how expensive these cases can become.

Notably, Strike 3 is demanding these subpoenas through Florida county court, where they can take advantage of a little-known type of complaint called a Bill of Pure Discovery. Many defendants are tempted to file Motions to Quash in order to protect their identities from being released, arguing that the Miami-Dade court is not the proper venue for copyright actions nor for defendants outside of Florida. However, Strike 3 doesn’t seem to stop going after defendants that ask for a Motion to Quash and simply refile the lawsuit in Federal court and become more aggressive.

Sometimes, filing a Motion to Quash is still advantageous. I’ve defended hundreds of cases against Strike 3 Holdings across the country, both in negotiating settlements and litigating in court. If you’ve received a notice from Comcast Communications and you’re considering a Motion to Quash, settling, or fighting in court, please call us at 888.801.8681 or email. Please have your case number and IP address ready. We’re happy to explain your options for defense and recommend the best way forward.

washington DC

Footer