If You’ve Received a Notice from Strike 3 Holdings – Read This
Strike 3 Holdings has filed 25 BitTorrrent-based copyright infringement lawsuits in Pennsylvania – in just one day! For any other type of Plaintiff, this would be extraordinarily difficult, however, Strike 3 Holdings manages to do so because each lawsuit is nearly identical. They allege their investigators observed an IP address repeatedly downloading the Plaintiff’s copyrighted works through BitTorrent networks and then sues each IP address for copyright infringement.
But, an IP address is just a unique identifier for an internet connection. In order to find the proper defendant, that is the person that actually downloaded the files, the Plaintiff subpoenas the Internet Service Provider (e.g., CenturyLink, Charter/Spectrum, XFinity/Comcast, Cox, Optimum/Altice, RCN, Verizon, etc.) for the subscriber’s identity. Some judges have noted that it’s dubious to assume the internet subscriber (the person that pays the bill) is the same person who downloaded the material. After all, many homes have multiple people who use the same internet connection – and unauthorized use can occur. Some subscribers may not even live at the residence the internet is being provided for, such as with landlords.
Yet, courts across the country have granted tremendous leeway to Strike 3 Holdings to allow them to get the identities of internet subscribers to try to find a person willing to pay a settlement. The settlement amounts are carefully calculated to be just below the cost of an effective defense.
Most subscribers find out about the lawsuit when they receive a notice from their Internet Service Provider (ISP) notifying them that Strike 3 Holdings has subpoenaed the subscriber’s identity. The ISP is obligated to comply with the subpoena unless a Motion to Quash is filed. This is a court motion to void or “quash” the subpoena. However, Motions to Quash are complex in these cases as the subpoena is between the Plaintiff and the ISP, meaning the subscriber is a third party. I’m happy to discuss with you whether filing a Motion to Quash or alternative motions is advisable in your case.
If you’ve received one of these notices or have been served with the lawsuit, it’s vital to retain counsel without delay. There are timelines imposed by the court that must be adhered to in order to defend yourself. This Plaintiff is notoriously aggressive and an effective defense can help secure the best possible outcome for you. Failing to respond in court once you have been served can result in a default judgement against you. Default judgments typically involve ruling in the Plaintiff’s favor and awarding thousands of dollars in damages per infringement in addition to the Plaintiff’s legal fees and costs.
For more information on what these lawsuits mean for internet subscribers, please check out our FAQ section.
I’ve defended hundreds of cases against Strike 3 Holdings and similar Plaintiffs, both in negotiating settlements and litigating in court.
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 in their first trial. I’ve represented over 600 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. Please don’t hesitate to call. 888.801.8681.
Yours,
Leonard French
[su_spoiler title=”The 25 new Strike 3 Holdings lawsuits in Pennsylvania are:” style=”modern-orange”][su_list icon=”icon: legal”]
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02732, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02734, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02735, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02736, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02737, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02738, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02739, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02740, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02741, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02742, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02743, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02744, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02745, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02746, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02747, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02748, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02749, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 2:19-cv-02751, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 5:19-cv-02733, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 5:19-cv-02752, filed 2019-06-24
- STRIKE 3 HOLDINGS, LLC v. DOE, case 5:19-cv-02753, filed 2019-06-24
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, case 1:19-cv-01074, filed 2019-06-24
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, case 1:19-cv-01075, filed 2019-06-24
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, case 1:19-cv-01076, filed 2019-06-24
- Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. John Doe, case 1:19-cv-01077, filed 2019-06-24
[/su_list][/su_spoiler]