Arista Records LLC v. John Does 1-19
551 F. Supp. 2d 1 (2008)
Rule of Law:
A copyright holder demonstrates "good cause" for expedited discovery to identify an anonymous defendant when they allege copyright ownership and unauthorized distribution by the defendant, as the plaintiff's right to pursue a meritorious infringement claim outweighs the defendant's minimal First Amendment interest in remaining anonymous while infringing.
Facts:
- Plaintiffs, ten music and recording entities, owned the copyrights to certain musical recordings.
- Nineteen unidentified individuals, known only by their Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, allegedly used an online media distribution system.
- Through this system, the individuals allegedly downloaded and/or distributed Plaintiffs' copyrighted recordings to the public.
- These actions were conducted without the permission or consent of the Plaintiffs.
- The IP addresses used by the unidentified individuals were traced to non-party The George Washington University (GW), which served as their Internet Service Provider.
Procedural Posture:
- Plaintiffs filed a complaint for copyright infringement against nineteen 'John Doe' defendants in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
- Simultaneously, Plaintiffs filed an ex parte motion for leave to take immediate discovery to identify the defendants via a subpoena to their Internet Service Provider (ISP), The George Washington University (GW).
- The court initially granted the motion, authorizing Plaintiffs to serve the subpoena on GW.
- Before GW responded, counsel for Defendant John Doe #3 filed a motion to vacate the court's order, quash the subpoena, and dismiss the complaint.
- GW filed a motion for an extension of time to respond to the subpoena.
- The court issued an order requiring Plaintiffs to show cause as to why the subpoena should not be quashed.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a copyright holder show 'good cause' for expedited discovery to identify an anonymous 'John Doe' defendant accused of infringement, overcoming the defendant's First Amendment right to anonymity, when the holder has alleged copyright ownership and unauthorized distribution?
Opinions:
Majority - Kollar-Kotelly
Yes. A copyright holder demonstrates good cause for expedited discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d) when such discovery is necessary to identify anonymous defendants and allow the lawsuit to proceed. The court determined that Plaintiffs established good cause because they could not advance their infringement suit without learning the identities of the John Doe defendants. The court rejected Defendant's argument that a heightened 'prima facie' standard was required but noted that even under that standard, Plaintiffs' allegations of copyright ownership and unauthorized distribution would suffice. Furthermore, the court held that a defendant's First Amendment right to anonymity is exceedingly small when the 'speech' at issue is copyright infringement, and it must give way to the copyright holder's right to protect its intellectual property through the judicial process. The court also dismissed arguments based on FERPA, finding an exception for court-ordered subpoenas seeking directory information.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the use of the 'good cause' standard for granting expedited discovery in cases of anonymous online copyright infringement, particularly within the D.C. Circuit. It affirms the principle that the First Amendment right to anonymous speech does not shield illegal activity like copyright infringement. This ruling provided a clear procedural pathway for copyright holders to unmask and sue individual file-sharers, becoming a key precedent in the wave of 'John Doe' lawsuits pursued by the recording and motion picture industries in the 2000s.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: Arista Records LLC v. John Does 1-19 (2008)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"