TCYK, LLC v. John Does 1-10

Filing 8

ORDER on Motion for Leave to Serve Third Party Subpoenas Prior to Rule 26(f) Conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 5/14/2013. (arw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

TCYK.,LLC,

Plaintiff.

)
)
) Case No.: 13-cv-297
)

)
)
)

v.
DOES 1-10,
Defendants.

)
)
)

ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SERVE
TIIIRD PARTY SUBPOENAS PRIOR TO A RULE 26(0 CONFERENCE
THIS CAUSE CaIue before the Cowi upon Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Serve
Third Party Subpoenas Prior to a Rule 26(f) Conference (the "Motion"), and the Court
being duly advised in the prel11ises does hereby:
FIND, ORDER AND ADJUDGE:
1. Plaintiff established that "good cause" exists for it to serve third party subpoenas

on the Intelnet Service Providers listed on Exhibit A to the Motion (the "ISPs").
See UMG Recording, Inc. v. Doe, 2008 WL 4104214, *4 (N.D. Cal. 2008); and
Arista Records LLC v. Does 1-19,551 F. Supp. 2d 1,6-7 (D.D.C. 2008).
2. Plaintiff may serve each of the ISPs with a Rule 45 subpoena cOInmanding each
ISP to provide Plaintiff with thr'true natue, address, telephone lllunber, e-mail
address and Media Access Control ("rvtAC") address of the Defendant to whom
the ISP assigned an IP address as set forth on Exhibit A to the Motion. Plaintiff
shall attach to any such subpoena a copy of this Order.

3. Plaintiff may also serve a Rule 45 subpoena in the same nlatlIler as above on any
service provider that is identified in response to a subpoena as a provider of
infenlet services to one ofthe Defendants.
4. Each of the ISPs that qualify as a "cable operator," as defined by 47 U.S.C. §
522(5), which states:
the

telm "cable

operator"

means

any

person

or

group

of perSOIlS

(A) who provides cable service over a cable systenl and directly or through
one or more affiliates owns a significant interest in such cable systelll, or

(B) ,vho otherwise controls or is responsible for, through any arrangeluent,
the management and operation of such a cable systelu
shall comply with 47 U.S.C. § 55 1(c)(2)(B), which states:
A cable operator may disclose such [personal identifying] information if the
disclosure is ... luade pursuant to a court order authorizing such disclosure, if
the subscriber is notified of such order by the person to whom the order is
directed.
by sending a copy of this Order to the Defendant.
5. The subpoenaed ISPs shall not require Plaintiff to pay a fee in advance of
providing the subpoenaed infonuation; nor shall the subpoenaed ISPs require
Plaintiff to pay a fee for an IP address that is not controlled by such ISP, or for
duplicate IP addresses that resolve to the SaIne individual, or for an IP address that
does not provide the llaIUe of a unique individual, or for the ISP's internal costs to
notifY its cust01l1ers. If necessary, the Court shall resolve any disputes between the
ISPs and Plaintiff regarding the reasonableness of the anlowlt proposed to be
charged by the ISP after the subpoenaed information is provided to Plaintiff.
6. If any particular Doe Defendant has been voluntarily disluissed then any motion
t

filed by said Defendant objecting to the disclosure of his or her identifying

infonnation is hereby denied as moot. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
applicable ISP shall withhold the moving Defendant's identifying iufonuation

fr0111 Plaintiff wlless and tUltil Plaintiff obtains a subsequent cou11 order
authorizing the disclosure.

DONE AND ORDERED this

' 1f11day of ~

, 2013.

BY~
UNI

STATES DISTRI€:r JUDGE
~6(~