In re DMCA Subpoena To Reddit, Inc.
383 F. Supp. 3d 900
N.D. Cal.2019Background
- Watch Tower filed a DMCA subpoena application to Reddit seeking the identity of an anonymous Redditor using the pseudonym "Darkspilver" for posting two items: an online advertisement (from a Watchtower magazine) and a chart derived from internal data. Reddit received the subpoena but had not produced the user; Reddit joined Darkspilver's motion to quash.
- Darkspilver is a lifelong Jehovah's Witness who posts anonymously on a Reddit forum (for former Jehovah's Witnesses) to criticize and discuss organizational practices; he lives outside the U.S. but many forum subscribers are U.S. residents.
- Darkspilver fears disclosure would lead to social ostracism, damage relationships, and chill his speech; he stopped posting after receiving notice of the subpoena.
- Watch Tower contends the posts infringed its copyrights and that disclosure is needed to enforce rights; it asserts no history of using subpoenaed identities to cause excommunication and argues First Amendment protections do not apply extraterritorially.
- The Court found the First Amendment applicable (given U.S. forum, U.S. parties, and U.S. audience), evaluated the Highfields/Art of Living two-part test for anonymous online speech, and assessed copyright ownership and fair use.
Issues
| Issue | Watch Tower's Argument | Darkspilver's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of motion to quash | Motion was untimely because it was filed after subpoena return date | He had no notice of subpoena until after return date; Reddit had not responded | Motion was timely; court considered merits |
| Does the First Amendment protect this anonymous, extraterritorial speaker? | First Amendment shouldn’t apply because speaker lives abroad; cites extraterritoriality precedents | First Amendment protects anonymous online speech and U.S. audience; protections extend to readers/audience | First Amendment applies (U.S. court, U.S. parties, substantial U.S. audience) |
| Has Watch Tower shown a prima facie copyright infringement to overcome anonymity? | Both items are Watch Tower copyrights and infringed | Fair use and lack of registration/originality for chart; identity should remain secret | Advertisement: prima facie infringement shown (registered work). Chart: insufficient evidence of copyright ownership/originality, so no prima facie showing |
| Balance of harms / fair use inquiry | Needs identity to enforce copyright; no undue harm will result | Disclosure would chill speech and cause severe personal harm; posting was noncommercial criticism — fair use | Balancing (considering fair use) favors protecting speaker; court orders disclosure to attorneys of record only (attorney-eyes-only) and permits Watch Tower to sue under pseudonym with identity sealed |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (distinguishes limits on extraterritorial application of constitutional rights)
- United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (Fourth Amendment protections limited extraterritorially)
- McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm'n, 514 U.S. 334 (anonymity protected by First Amendment)
- In re Anonymous Online Speakers, 661 F.3d 1168 (9th Cir.) (online anonymous speech receives full First Amendment scrutiny; nature of speech drives standard)
- Highfields Capital Mgmt., L.P. v. Doe, 385 F. Supp. 2d 969 (N.D. Cal.) (two-part test for unmasking anonymous online speakers)
- Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., 815 F.3d 1145 (fair use is authorized by law and relevant to DMCA takedown/subpoena context)
- Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (fair use framework; transformative use inquiry)
- Victor Lalli Enters., Inc. v. Big Red Apple, Inc., 936 F.2d 671 (2d Cir.) (compilations/charts may lack originality for copyright)
- Mattel, Inc. v. Walking Mountain Prods., 353 F.3d 792 (9th Cir.) (fair use factors and analysis)