Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-01805/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cv-01805-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 820
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IO GROUP, INC., dba a

California Corporation Titan

Media,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

JOHN DOE,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C08-1805 MMC (BZ)

ORDER DENYING ADMINISTRATIVE

REQUEST TO TAKE DISCOVERY

Plaintiff has filed an administrative request for leave

to take immediate discovery to determine the identity of

defendant John Doe. Plaintiff claims defendant has been

posting its copyrighted material on his blog. The blog is

alleged to be located on blogger.com, a commercial enterprise

of Google, Inc. Plaintiff seeks leave to serve a subpoena on

Google, Inc. to determine defendant’s internet protocol

address and to serve a subsequent subpoena on the appropriate

ISP provider to determine defendant’s identity.

Plaintiff has failed to show good cause for the requested

discovery. Essentially, plaintiff is seeking to discover the

Case 3:08-cv-01805-MMC Document 8 Filed 04/28/08 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

identity of a person who allegedly posted information on the

internet anonymously. Plaintiff’s request implicates John

Doe’s privacy and potentially implicates his First Amendment

rights. See e.g. Highfields Capital Mgmt. L.P. v. Doe, 385 F.

Supp. 2d 969 (N.D. Cal. 2005); Sony Music Entm’t Inc. v. Does

1-40, 326 F.Supp.2d 556, 562 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). Under such

circumstances, plaintiff must show that there is a need for

the discovery that outweighs John Doe’s privacy and potential

First Amendment rights. Here plaintiff’s showing is

inadequate. 

The only declaration submitted in support of plaintiff’s

request is from an officer of plaintiff, who uses the name

Keith Webb but states that Webb is a pseudonym that he uses in

place of his true legal name. This suggests that plaintiff is

aware that there may be privacy and First Amendment rights at

issue. Plaintiff makes no showing why it did not try to file

under seal a declaration signed by the declarant, using his

true name. 

In any event, “Webb’s” declaration does not explain other

than in superficial terms what infringement John Doe Is

supposed to have committed. Instead, it references the

allegations of the complaint, which is also unsworn. The

signature page appears to be from a different document than

the rest of the declaration, paragraph 13 begins on page 3 

and page 4 and the typefont is different. This undermines the 

///

///

///

Case 3:08-cv-01805-MMC Document 8 Filed 04/28/08 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

integrity of the skimpy declaration. 

For the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s request is DENIED.

Dated: April 28, 2008

 Bernard Zimmerman

United States Magistrate Judge

G:\BZALL\-REFS\IO GROUP V. DOE\ORD DENYING ADMIN RQST FOR EXPEDITE DISC.wpd

Case 3:08-cv-01805-MMC Document 8 Filed 04/28/08 Page 3 of 3