941 F. Supp. 2d 153
D. Mass.2013Background
- Patrick Collins owns the copyright to the motion picture Big Wet Brazilian Asses 7 and sues 38 Doe defendants identified only by IP addresses for alleged BitTorrent infringement.
- Plaintiff seeks damages and injunctive relief, pursuing copyright infringement and contributory infringement under 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq.
- Plaintiff obtained ex parte discovery to serve Rule 45 subpoenas on ISPs to identify Doe defendants, leading to settlements with four Does and dismissal without public identities.
- Doe 30 and a Pro Se Doe moved to quash the subpoenas or sever the case, arguing privacy interests and improper joinder respectively.
- The court granted early discovery but recommended severance of all Doe defendants except Doe 1, and denied Doe 30’s motion to quash as moot.
- The court raised concerns about ‘copyright trolling’ and coercive settlement practices in BitTorrent cases, emphasizing fairness and judicial economy in severance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do the Does have standing to challenge subpoenas to ISPs? | Collins argues Does lack standing as nonparties with no privilege. | Does contend privacy interests grant standing to challenge subpoenas. | Doe defendants have standing to challenge subpoenas. |
| Should Pro Se Doe proceed anonymously at this stage? | No need to anonymize since no prejudice shown. | Anonymity warranted to protect identity in sensitive BitTorrent cases. | Pro Se Doe may proceed anonymously at this preliminary stage. |
| Is permissive joinder under Rule 20 appropriate for 38 Doe defendants in a BitTorrent swarm? | Joinder promotes efficiency by addressing common questions of law and fact. | Joinder would be unfair and inefficient due to individualized defenses. | Joinder may be technically permissible, but severance is appropriate to protect fairness and economy. |
| Should the court sever the Does under Rule 21 and dismiss most claims without prejudice? | Joinder should be retained to reserve claims against all Does. | Severance prevents unfair prejudice and reduces litigation complexity. | Severance of all Does except Doe Number 1 and dismissal without prejudice is recommended. |
Key Cases Cited
- Malibu Media, LLC v. John Does 1-14, 287 F.R.D. 513 (N.D. Ind. 2012) (Doe has standing to challenge ISP subpoenas; privacy interests recognized)
- Third Degree Films v. Does 1-47, 286 F.R.D. 188 (D. Mass. 2012) (joinder may be technically proper but severance may be warranted for fairness)