DMCA Subpoena Fight, Though Unsuccessful, Was 'Creative,' Professor Says
The idea that Digital Millennium Copyright Act Section 512(h) pre-empts unmasking lawsuits against John Doe defendants is "a creative argument, but not a meritorious one," Santa Clara University Director-High Tech Law Institute Professor Eric Goldman blogged Wednesday. Section 512(h) covers…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
subpoenas of service providers for identification of an alleged copyright infringer. Goldman cited Monday's docket 18-cv-00571-EAW decision (in Pacer) by U.S. District Judge Elizabeth Wolford of Rochester, New York, denying a motion to quash a third-party subpoena that adult film producer and streaming service Strike 3 sought against the defendant's ISP for the identity of the John Doe whom Strike 3 accused of BitTorrent piracy of company content. The defendant argued allowing service of a subpoena on a third-party ISP conflicted with DMCA privacy provisions and the Communications Act, but that doesn't acknowledge a Communications Act exception allowing such a subpoena, or that the vast majority of opinions in similar cases have granted leave to serve those subpoenas, Wolford said. She said most Strike 3 suits end in voluntary dismissal after subpoenas are served, but there's no evidence to back the John Doe's claim Strike 3 "is engaging in copyright troll litigation tactics."