Jonathan LA Phillips, Attorney at Law
Illinois IP Attorney

BitTorrent Suits

Defending those targeted by BitTorrent plaintiffs

Did you receive a subpoena or suit concerning the download of a movie?

Do not fear. You are not alone. BitTorrent suits are the largest source of copyright litigation in the United States. Companies like Malibu Media and Strike 3 Holdings lead the way in filing these suits. Not only does Jonathan LA Phillips defend these suits, but he often does so with a tried and true method that generates positive results at low-costs for his clients. He offers

Free consultations, flat rates, and payment plans for bittorrent defenses.

Jonathan has defended BitTorrent suits since their inception under the infamous Prenda Law firm and its plaintiffs. Since then, he has handled well over one-hundred disputes with BitTorrent plaintiffs throughout the United States. In doing so, Jonathan has developed a network of local counsel that allows him to assist clients throughout the United States.

Further, Jonathan is a known and recognized attorney in this field. The Illinois State Bar Association has twice published Mr. Phillips' writings on BitTorrent cases. His experience and knowledge allows him to offer tailored and cost-effective litigation strategies aimed at getting you the results you need.

Jonathan has a track record of success for his clients

Some of Jonathan’s BitTorrent successes follow. It is important to remember that past success does not guaranty future success.

  • In a recent Southern District of Texas case, Strike 3 Holdings publicly named Jonathan’s client in a case. Jonathan was able to “put the cat back in the bag,” and get the filings sealed.

  • In the Southern District of New York, Strike 3 Holdings, LLC sued Jonathan’s client. Before Strike 3 Holdings was able to obtain his client’s identity, the plaintiff settled the matter on terms agreeable to Jonathan’s client.

  • In the Southern District of Texas, Malibu Media sued Mr. Phillips’ client. Malibu Media, LLC v. John Doe, subscriber assigned IP address 99.90.89.28. Using his tried and true method for defending these actions, Malibu Media sought to settle its case. The parties settled the matter to their mutual satisfaction.

  • In the Southern District of New York, Jonathan Phillips defended a Malibu Media case that Malibu refused to dismiss at the outset. In Malibu Media, LLC v. Levin, Jonathan served discovery aimed at demonstrating a hole at the core of Malibu’s case. Shortly afterwards, Malibu settled the matter on terms favorable to Jonathan’s client. The dismissal even stated that it was apparent Jonathan’s client was not the infringer.

  • In PTG Nevada, LLC v. Knott, Jonathan utilized his well honed method for defending a BitTorrent copyright case brought by PTG Nevada. In that Colorado case, our client answered the complaint, requiring the plaintiff to secure Jonathan’s client’s permission (or the permission of the Court) to dismiss the case. In the end, Jonathan’s client agreed to dismiss the case after settling on terms favorable for our client. 

  • In Malibu Media, LLC v. John Doe, Jonathan represented an individual accused of copyright infringement. Malibu Media accused the client, who was kept anonymous throughout the proceedings, of using BitTorrent to pirate its works. After discovery, all parties filed Motions for Summary Judgment. After thorough briefing, and our subsequent motions to strike portions of Malibu's motion and response, Northern District of Illinois Magistrate Judge Brown granted Jonathan’s client’s Motion for Summary Judgment on February 8th, 2016.  This was one of the first victories against one of the most prolific copyright plaintiffs in the United States.

  • Multitudes of settlements on terms agreeable terms for his clients. 

What can Jonathan do for you in your BitTorrent case?

Jonathan Phillips offers free initial consultations in BitTorrent cases. Prior to the consultation, he will review the complaint and determine if there are defects in the investigators’ methods. Those investigators are typically usually IPP International U.G., Excipio, or MaverickEye, all based in Germany. During the consultation, Jonathan will discuss the plaintiff’s evidence, your circumstances, and provide you with information concerning the case. After that, Jonathan will provide you with a series of options to consider. Depending on the specific facts of your case and situation, he may present you with options concerning litigating the matter, settling the matter, or some other option. In the end, every case is fact and situation specific. Jonathan will ensure you are fully informed so that you can make a good decision on how to move forward.

Typical litigation options

Unlike some attorneys, Jonathan does not simply settle all of his cases. If you choose to litigate, Jonathan Phillips does not do so with bluster. He typically utilizes a well thought out and established methodology that both keeps your costs down and maximizes your chances of receiving an award of fees at the conclusion of the dispute.

Typically Jonathan advises opposing counsel of the defects in the plaintiff’s (e.g. Malibu Media, Strike 3 Holdings, Bodyguard Productions, etc…) investigation and offer to allow them out of the case at that point. This early stage, even-handed approach, allows an early resolution of the case with little cost to the client. If opposing counsel takes us up on the offer, the case ends. Unfortunately, opposing counsel rarely does. Although, this is occurring more often recently. If the plaintiff refuses to drop the case, then he offers his clients a variety of litigation paths for the initial stages of a defense.

Our litigation options include one of, or some combination of:

·       Motions to proceed anonymously to protect your identity;

·       Moving to dismiss the case at the outset because of flaws in the investigation;

·       Answering the complaint and serving discovery that will point out the flaws in the plaintiff's case.

For those of you who have done your research, you may ask, “Where is the motion to quash the subpoena to my internet service provider?” In many jurisdictions, a motion to quash is inadvisable. They are rarely successful and may cause adverse consequences. That said, if your case is in a jurisdiction that a motion to quash is a valid option, we will present you with the option.

Settlement

Jonathan regularly negotiates settlement for his clients. Some wish to put the matter behind them. Some clients have circumstances and facts that lead them to settlement. Unlike others, though, Jonathan does not push settlement on all of his clients. But, when that is the best path forward, then Jonathan gets results. He offers settlement negotiations on a flat rate and a payment plan. Contact him for a free consultation to determine whether settlement is right for you and the likely settlement amount range he can achieve for you.