Strike 3 Holdings Subpoena or Lawsuit? Defense for Internet Account Holders

Strike 3 Holdings sues internet subscribers in federal court, claiming their IP address shared its adult films over BitTorrent, then subpoenas the internet provider for the subscriber's name. Jonathan Phillips has defended BitTorrent cases since the Prenda Law era and has handled well over one hundred of these disputes in federal courts nationwide, including a contested summary judgment win.

  • Who sues

    • Strike 3 Holdings, LLC, owner of the Vixen, Tushy, and Blacked film brands, among others

  • What they claim

    • Copyright infringement through BitTorrent, identified by IP address

  • Damages the statute allows

  • Where

    • Federal courts nationwide; thousands of cases since 2025 and its been going on for years

  • Your first deadline

    • The date in your provider's notice, after which it releases your name

How does a Strike 3 case work?

  1. Strike 3 records an IP address it says shared its films over BitTorrent.

  2. It files a federal lawsuit against "John Doe," identified only by that IP address.

  3. It asks the court for permission to subpoena your internet provider before the case otherwise begins.

  4. Your provider sends you a notice and a date by which it will release your name.

  5. Once Strike 3 has your name, it amends the complaint or sends a settlement demand.

Is the IP address proof that I did it?

No. An IP address identifies an internet connection, not a person. Anyone with access to the connection, including family members, roommates, guests, or a neighbor on open Wi-Fi, could be responsible. Strike 3's model depends on defendants settling before anyone tests that link, and several judges now require more from Strike 3 before allowing the subpoena at all.

What defenses work?

  • Identity. If Strike 3 cannot tie the download to you specifically, its case rests on inference.

  • Early procedural challenges. Jonathan has successfully argued that Strike 3 had not justified unmasking a subscriber, buying time and leverage before the client was ever named.

  • Sealing and anonymity. Moving quickly to seal or proceed anonymously can limit public exposure even after suit is filed.

  • Settlement on the right terms. Strike 3's opening demands often bear little relationship to what courts award. Some of Jonathan's clients resolved their cases before Strike 3 ever learned their names.

Settle or fight?

  • If you have a shared connection (household, roommates, business, open Wi-Fi), you can challenge identity when approrpriate and consider resolving before disclosure

  • You have only received the provider's notice; then act before the release date; consider a motion to proceed anonymously if you intend to fight

  • You have been named and served; your answer deadline is usually 21 days from service; litigate or negotiate on the merits

  • The download happened on your account and you know how; Likely call is to negotiate early, with sealing or anonymity as part of the terms

Results

In a Malibu Media case (a predecessor in substance to Strike 3) in the Northern District of Illinois, Jonathan took the case through full discovery and cross-motions for summary judgment. Magistrate Judge Brown granted his client's motion, one of the first defense wins against one of the most prolific copyright plaintiffs of its time. Jonathan then moved for attorney's fees, and the plaintiff settled on terms favorable to his client.

Other results include:

  • Pre-identity settlements where the plaintiff never learned the client's name.

  • Sealed filings after public identification.

  • Dismissals where the court noted it was apparent the client was not the infringer.

These results came in courts across the the Northern District of Illinois, Southern District of New York, Southern District of Texas, and District of Colorado. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Other BitTorrent plaintiffs

The same defense applies to other BitTorrent filers, including Flava Works in the Northern District of Illinois and independent film companies represented by Culpepper IP. Malibu Media, Voltage, and Millennium Funding were major filers in earlier years; Jonathan defended Malibu Media cases, including the summary judgment win above, and the archive of writing on them remains on this site.

Frequently asked questions

Will my name become public? Not necessarily. Many cases resolve before the name is released, and courts often allow defendants to proceed anonymously or under seal in these cases.

Can I ignore the notice from my internet provider? You can, but your provider will usually release your name on the stated date, and the case continues without your input.

Do I need a lawyer in the state where I was sued? Jonathan works with local counsel where needed, and represents clients in districts across the country.

What does it cost? Flat fees and payment plans are available for most BitTorrent matters.

Recent writing

Jonathan L.A. Phillips, Brown, Hay & Stephens, LLP. Part of the Serial Plaintiff Tracker. Last reviewed October 2026.