Close
Updated:

Indiana Copyright Litigation: Maker of Movie “Once Upon a Time in Venice” Suing BitTorrent Users Who May Have Pirated Movie

By

Indiana – Attorneys for Plaintiff, Venice, P.I. had filed suit in the Northern District of Indiana alleging that many anonymous Defendants, as listed below, infringed the Plaintiff’s copyright:

  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 73.74.68.193
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 73.8.175.142
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 73.209.174.92
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 98.213.220.109
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 73.168.17.91
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 98.213.172.19
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 73.74.106.137
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 69.245.164.96
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 73.45.112.180
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 98.212.74.25
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 73.74.255.45
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 24.12.48.30
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 98.213.98.148
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 67.167.74.65
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 69.176.94.127
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 73.176.94.127
  • Venice PI, LLC v. John Doe, having an IP address of 73.75.159.202

The John Does listed are alleged to have illegally distributed copies of the movie “Once Upon a Time in Venice,” to which Plaintiff allegedly holds the copyright. Plaintiff claims that the Defendants used the software BitTorrent to distribute copies of the movie.

John Doe 1 filed Motions to Quash or Vacate, Issue a Protective Order, and/or Sever and Dismiss, and the Court ruled on the Motion to Sever. Plaintiff claimed that joining all 18 claims together would promote judicial economy, but the Court disagreed and found no evidence that it would. Further, the Court exercised its broad discretion to sever claims to avoid prejudice and unfairness to any defendants.

The Court stated that the Plaintiff must move forward and sue each Defendant separately.

The cases were filed in the Northern District of Indiana and assigned Judge Joseph Van Bokkelen and Magistrate Judge John E. Martin. The severed case will proceed under Case. No. 2:18-cv-00160-JVB-JEM.

Opinion and Order

Contact Us