Rotten Records, Inc. v. Doe
107 F. Supp. 3d 257
W.D.N.Y.2015Background
- Plaintiff Rotten Records sued an anonymous online user (identified only by IP address 74.77.29.51) for alleged copyright infringement of the album “Acid Bath — When The Kite String Pops.”
- Plaintiff used Rightscorp, a forensic firm, which recorded BitTorrent transactions and concluded the file shared from that IP was identical to Plaintiff’s copyrighted work.
- Plaintiff moved ex parte for leave to serve a Rule 45 subpoena on Time Warner Cable (TWC) for the subscriber’s name and address before the Rule 26(f) conference in order to effect service.
- Plaintiff argued expedited discovery was necessary because ISPs will not voluntarily disclose subscriber identities and logs may be deleted over time.
- The court evaluated the standard for expedited discovery (good cause) using established factors (prima facie claim, specificity, lack of alternatives/need, and defendant’s privacy expectation).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether expedited discovery (pre-Rule 26(f)) is justified to subpoena ISP for subscriber identity | Needs subpoena to learn defendant’s name/address to serve complaint; Rightscorp data shows infringement | (Implicit) Subscriber privacy and procedural limits on early discovery | Granted: court found good cause for immediate Rule 45 subpoena to TWC |
| Whether Plaintiff has a prima facie copyright claim | Ownership of copyright and Rightscorp evidence that the shared file is identical to the work | (Implicit) Challenge to sufficiency not raised at this stage | Found sufficient: plaintiff alleged valid copyright and copying |
| Whether the discovery request is sufficiently specific | Seeks only name and address tied to a single IP for service purposes | (Implicit) Overbroad or fishing expedition concerns | Found specific and limited to identifying defendant for service |
| Whether defendant’s privacy outweighs plaintiff’s need | Plaintiff’s need to pursue claim and risk of data loss outweighs privacy | Defendant would assert expectation of privacy in subscriber records | Found privacy expectation minimal for alleged online file-sharing infringer; disclosure permitted subject to protective limits |
Key Cases Cited
- In re BitTorrent Adult Film Copyright Infringement Cases, 296 F.R.D. 80 (E.D.N.Y. 2012) (discusses good-cause standard for expedited discovery in BitTorrent copyright cases)
- Sony Music Entm’t Inc. v. Does 1-40, 326 F. Supp. 2d 556 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (defines prima facie copyright infringement elements)
- Arista Records LLC v. Doe, 604 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2010) (online file-sharing defendants have a limited privacy expectation)