Case 3:12-cv-00964-TJC-TEM Document 20 Filed 12/13/12 Page 1 of 5 PageID 416

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

WEST COAST PRODUCTIONS, INC., Plaintiff, vs. JOHN DOES 1-675, Defendants. __________________________________ MALIBU MEDIA, LLC, Plaintiff, vs. JOHN DOES 1-19, Defendants. __________________________________ MALIBU MEDIA, LLC, Plaintiff, vs. JOHN DOES 1-46, Defendants. __________________________________ Case No. 5:12-cv-522-J-UATC-PRL Case No. 3:12-cv-335-J-32MCR Case No. 3:12-cv-964-J-32TEM

ORDER These cases are before the Court sua sponte. The plaintiffs in these cases similarly allege that the John Doe Defendants have infringed on Plaintiffs copyrights to pornographic motion pictures through the use of a peer-to-peer file sharing protocol, or torrent protocol. Due to the nature of such technology, Plaintiffs are initially unable to

Case 3:12-cv-00964-TJC-TEM Document 20 Filed 12/13/12 Page 2 of 5 PageID 417

identify the Defendants by anything other than the internet protocol (IP) addresses for each Defendant. Thus, the Plaintiffs sought leave to take early discovery by way of Rule 45 subpoenas served on the internet service providers (ISPs). These cases are at various stages of progress, but in each case the Court has permitted plaintiffs to serve subpoenas on the ISPs to obtain identifying information for the John Doe Defendants. Currently, the Court has under advisement in these cases various motions and reports and recommendations.1 However, before proceeding any further the Court will first address the issue of severance. Plaintiffs have joined numerous defendants under the theory that these John Doe Defendants participated in a swarm by which they downloaded and uploaded Plaintiffs copyrighted works. However, the Court recognizes and finds noteworthy that a number of courts have rejected this theory of joinder, including recently, my colleague in this district. Malibu Media, LLC v. Does 1-28, No. 8:12-cv-1667T-27MAP, Doc. 22 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 6, 2012); see also, e.g.,Third Degree Films v. Does 147, No. 12-10761-WGY, 2012 WL 4498911 (D. Mass. Oct. 2, 2012). Many of those courts addressed the issue of joinder prior to identification of the Doe Defendants. See, e.g., Arista Records, LLC v. Does 1-11, No. 1:07-cv-2828, 2008 WL 4823160 (N.D. Ohio Nov.

3:12-cv-964-J-32TEM, Doe 10's Motion to Quash With Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Drop Doe 10 As A Party, and Motion to Reconsider Order (Doc. 10), Doe 31's Motion to Quash and/or Motion for Protective Order (Doc. 12), Doe 25's Omnibus Motion to Quash, Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Sever or Drop Party, and Motion to Reconsider Order (Doc. 15), Doe 2's Omnibus Motion to Quash, Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Sever or Drop Party, and Motion to Reconsider Order (Doc. 16), Doe 21's Omnibus Motion to Quash, Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Sever or Drop Party, and Motion to Reconsider Order (Doc. 17), and Doe 22's Motion to Quash, Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Drop Party or Sever and Dismiss (Doc. 18); 3:12-cv-335-J32MCR, Motion to Dismiss/Sever and For A Protective Order and/or to Quash Subpoena (Doc. 15) and the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 37); 3:12-cv-334-J-32JBT, Doe 7's Motion to Quash Subpoena and For Protective Order, and Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Sever Action (Doc. 12) and the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 31). 2

Case 3:12-cv-00964-TJC-TEM Document 20 Filed 12/13/12 Page 3 of 5 PageID 418

3, 2008) (collecting cases). Courts have also expressed concern with copyright trolling and suspect settlement tactics. See, e.g., Third Degree Films, 2012 WL 4498911, at *1; On the Cheap, LLC v. Does 1-5011, No. C10-4472 BZ, 280 F.R.D. 500, 504 (N.D. Cal. 2011). Those concerns may or may not be valid, but this Court wishes to address whether the joinder of so many different defendants under this swarm theory is improper or contrary to the purpose of permissive joinder, or both. See Malibu Media, LLC, No. 3:12cv-1667-T-27MAP, Doc. 22 at 9-15 (exercising discretion to sever defendants under Rule 21); Third Degree Films, 2012 WL 4498911, at *6 (The purpose of permissive joinder of parties is to promote trial convenience and expedite the final determination of disputes.) (internal quotation omitted). Therefore, the Court intends to address the issue of

severance prior to allowing these cases to proceed. In addition, the title of the motion picture that is the subject of the complaint in West Coast Productions v. Does 1-675, No. 3:12-cv-964-J-32TEM, is suggestive of child pornography. As such, the Court requires assurances that it is not. Thus, the Court finds that these cases should not proceed further until the Court addresses the issue of severance. Therefore, while the Court considers this issue and the various motions, these cases will be stayed. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. These cases are STAYED and administratively closed pending further order of the Court. 2. All discovery in these cases is STAYED, including attempts to discover the identities of the Doe Defendants and settlement overtures.

Case 3:12-cv-00964-TJC-TEM Document 20 Filed 12/13/12 Page 4 of 5 PageID 419

3.

No later than January 9, 2013, Plaintiffs shall address in a brief limited to twenty (20) pages why the Defendants should not be severed. Plaintiffs may stand on their original papers addressing the issue, if filed, but shall inform the Court by the same deadline if they intend to do so and the corresponding docket entry.

4.

Any Defendant may respond, but is not required to, no later than January 30, 2013. They may also stand on their original papers, if filed, by informing the Court by the same deadline if they intend to do so and the corresponding docket entry.

5.

Plaintiffs counsel shall forthwith serve a copy of this Order on any and all internet service providers (or their counsel) on which they have served a subpoena.

6.

No later than January 9, 2013, Plaintiff West Coast Productions in Case No. 3:12-cv-964-J-32TEM shall provide the Court with assurances that the subject motion picture is not child pornography.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Jacksonville, Florida, on this 13th day of December, 2012.

Case 3:12-cv-00964-TJC-TEM Document 20 Filed 12/13/12 Page 5 of 5 PageID 420

sa. Copies: Counsel of Record any unrepresented parties