Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-01578/USCOURTS-casd-3_08-cv-01578-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:501 Copyright Infringement

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 1 - 08cv1578

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ATLANTIC RECORDING CORPORATION, 

a Delaware corporation; ARISTA RECORDS

LLC, a Delaware limited liability company;

BMG MUSIC, a New York general

partnership; CAPITOL RECORDS, LLC, a

Delaware limited liability company;

ELEKTRA ENTERTAINMENT GROUP

INC., a Delaware corporation; EMI

CHRISTIAN MUSIC GROUP INC., a

California corporation; FONOVISA, INC., a

California corporation; LAFACE RECORDS

LLC, A Delaware limited liability company;

LAVA RECORDS LLC, a Delaware limited

liability company; MAVERICK RECORDING

COMPANY, a California joint venture;

MOTOWN RECORD COMPANY, L.P., a

California limited partnership; SONY BMG

MUSIC ENTERTAINMENT, a Delaware

general partnership; UMG RECORDINGS,

INC., a Delaware corporation; VIRGIN

RECORDS AMERICA, INC., a California

corporation; WARNER BROS. RECORDS

INC., a Delaware corporation; ZOMBA

RECORDING LLC, a Delaware limited

liability company; and INTERSCOPE

RECORDS, a California general partnership,

Civil No. 08cv1578-WQH (POR)

Plaintiffs, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ EX

PARTE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE

TO TAKE IMMEDIATE DISCOVERY

[Doc. # 3]

v.

DOES 1-37,

Defendants.

On August 28, 2008, Plaintiffs filed a complaint against the Doe Defendant for copyright

infringement, alleging that Defendant used an online media distribution system to download and

Case 3:08-cv-01578-WQH-POR Document 4 Filed 10/23/08 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 - 08cv1578

distribute copyrighted works. Plaintiffs do not know the name of the Doe Defendant, but have

identified the unique Internet Protocol address assigned to Defendant at the date and time of the

alleged infringing activity and have also identified the Internet Service Provider that provided

Defendant with internet access at the date and time of the alleged infringing activity. 

On September 30, 2008, Plaintiffs filed an Ex Parte Application seeking leave of the Court

to serve immediate discovery on the Internet Service Provider, SBC Internet Services, Inc. (“SBC”),

to identify Defendant. Plaintiffs intend to serve a subpoena pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 45 on SBC seeking documents that identify Defendant’s true name, current and

permanent addresses and telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, and Media Access Control

addresses.

In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(d), discovery does not commence

until parties to an action meet and confer as prescribed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f),

unless by court order or agreement of the parties. A court order permitting early discovery may be

appropriate “where the need for expedited discovery, in consideration of the administration of

justice, outweighs the prejudice to the responding party.” Semitool, Inc. v. Tokyo Electron

America, Inc., 208 F.R.D. 273, 276 (N.D.Cal. 2002). 

After reviewing Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application to take discovery, the declaration of Carlos

Linares, and the accompanying Memorandum of Law, the Court finds good cause to grant Plaintiffs’

Application, based on: (1) the allegations of copyright infringement contained in Plaintiffs

complaint; (2) the danger that SBC will not preserve the information that Plaintiffs seek; (3) the

narrow tailoring of the discovery request so as not to exceed the minimum information required to

advance this lawsuit without prejudicing the Defendant; and (4) the Court’s finding that the

expedited discovery requested will substantially contribute to moving this case forward. 

Furthermore, without such discovery, Plaintiffs cannot identify the Doe Defendant, and thus cannot

pursue their lawsuit to protect their copyrighted works from infringement. Accordingly, IT IS

HEREBY ORDERED:

1. Plaintiffs may serve immediate discovery on SBC to obtain the identity of the Doe

Defendant by serving a subpoena pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 that

Case 3:08-cv-01578-WQH-POR Document 4 Filed 10/23/08 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 - 08cv1578

seeks information sufficient to identify the Doe Defendant, including the name,

current and permanent addresses and telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, and

Media Access Control addresses for the Defendant.

2. Any information disclosed to Plaintiffs in response to the subpoena may be used by

Plaintiffs solely for the purpose of protecting Plaintiffs’ rights under the Copyright

Act.

3. If SBC and/or the Defendant wishes to move to quash the subpoena, they shall do so

before the return date of the subpoena. If such a motion is brought, SBC shall

nonetheless preserve the information sought in the subpoena pending resolution of

such motion.

4. Plaintiffs shall provide a copy of this Order to SBC when the subpoena is served. 

DATED: October 23, 2008

LOUISA S PORTER

United States Magistrate Judge

cc: Honorable William Q. Hayes

All parties

 

Case 3:08-cv-01578-WQH-POR Document 4 Filed 10/23/08 Page 3 of 3