Malibu Media: Motion to Quash Denied in New York
This is a blog dedicated to updates on copyright infringement cases. We have handled more than 900 Malibu Media cases over the past seven years, helping each client figure out the best option for their individual situation. We can represent you in your case against Malibu Media. For more information about your subpoena visit our main website’s Malibu Media page.
In November 2018, Malibu Media alleged that defendant at IP address 72.229.110.129 had infringed several of their copyrights by illegally downloading several of their adult films.
On December 6, 2018, the court granted Malibu Media leave to serve a subpoena to the defendant’s internet service provider- Charter Communications, Inc.- in order to learn the defendant’s identity and address, and then to serve the defendant with a court summons.
The defendant filed a motion to quash on two grounds:
First, the defendant argued that Malibu Media’s Complaint was legally deficient on a ruling recently adopted by the Supreme Court. Essentially, the defendant is saying this action should have been barred (for now) as Malibu Media doesn’t have the right to sue without a copyright certificate for each film. (Click here to read a recent blog post on that decision).
Malibu Media then filed an Amended Complaint alleging that six of the copyrights at issue had been registered prior to filing the original Complaint, and that three more were registered prior to filing the Amended Complaint.
According to the Memorandum Opinion and Order by Jesse M. Furman, District Judge:
“Plaintiff’s second argument rehashes issues relating to personal jurisdiction that the Court resolved in Digital Sin. Def.’s Mem. 5-9. There, the Court held that the plaintiff’s allegations of personal jurisdiction relying on geolocation software are “sufficient at this stage of the proceedings.” Digital Sin, 2012 WL 2036035, at *3. The Court reached the same preliminary conclusion as to Plaintiff’s similar allegations in this case.”
Due to these two issues, the defendant’s motion to quash the Malibu Media subpoena was denied.
Charter Communications was instructed to respond to the subpoena no later than April 8, 2019.
The judge went on to note:
“Unless and until the Court orders otherwise, Plaintiff must continue to comply with the Court’s Order granting Defendant leave to proceed anonymously as John Doe; that means that Plaintiff must redact any information tending to reveal Defendant’s identity from its public filings, including proof of service, if any — while simultaneously filing unredacted versions under seal in accordance with the Court’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases, available at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judge/Furman.”
Are you considering a motion to quash in your case against Malibu Media?
No matter how you decide to handle your copyright infringement case, it’s best to discuss all your options with an ISP Subpoena Defense specialist.
We represent clients nationwide. Click here for a free consultation.
Share! Save Someone From Being Sued
I received a Comcast Copyright Infringement Letter and Subpoena – Help!
MALIBU MEDIA LLC: New TEXAS Lawsuits
Strike 3 Holdings – A Client’s View
About Author
JAntonelli
Jeffrey Antonelli is a member of the federal trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois and is admitted to numerous federal courts around the country. He has been a civil litigator nearly 25 years in a broad range of actions representing corporations and individuals as plaintiffs and defendants in state and federal court. Jeffrey has been interviewed by the media many times, including Bloomberg BNA, NBC, The New York Times, Chicago Lawyer, Chicago Tribune, and the longstanding lawyer’s publication Chicago Daily Law Bulletin. Prior to forming Antonelli Law Ltd. in 2007 Jeffrey worked for several litigation boutiques in Chicago’s Loop as well as a full service firm. His litigation experience includes hotly contested issues in intellectual property, business, insurance, and consumer fraud. He is an adviser to the Illinois Board of Higher Education Advisory Council for Private Business and Vocational Schools (PBVS), and was a member of the Illinois State Bar Association Education Law Section Council from 2012-2013. Jeffrey is especially proud of his work representing hundreds of students defrauded by improperly accredited educational institutions, including as certified class counsel. Before attending law school, Jeffrey was interested first in business, and then in biomedical ethics. These interests led him to graduate from the nation’s largest philosophy department at Loyola University in Chicago, where some of his favorite (and most challenging) subjects were cognitive science and philosophy of science. During college he held positions at the University of Chicago’s Ben May Institute; as a medical assistant for a University of Chicago foot and ankle surgeon; and volunteered in the emergency room at the University of Chicago Hospitals. These experiences led to studying health law at the DePaul College of Law where Jeffrey earned his law degree and a certificate in health law. At that time DePaul’s Institute for Health Law was consistently ranked in the top 10 health law specialty programs nationwide. During law school Jeffrey immersed himself in studying the practical and public policy aspects of health care through internships at the American Medical Association in Chicago, and on Capitol Hill at the Governmental Relations Office of the Association of American Medical Colleges in Washington, DC. Jeffrey has concentrated in civil litigation throughout his legal career, and is a member of the federal trial bar of the Northern District of Illinois, the Central District of Illinois federal court, and all federal courts of Colorado, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Indiana. In addition, he is a member of the DuPage County Bar Association and the Illinois State Bar Association. Jeffrey prides himself on his strong personal ideals, passionate, ethical advocacy, and working hard to bring the best possible results for his clients. He also maintains a special interest in cases involving fraud. Whether due to good parenting, his family’s law enforcement employment, undergraduate studies in philosophy including ethics, or a fortuitous outcome of good breeding, one essence of Jeffrey’s character is a drive to root out the truth behind fraudulent practices.