Public Beta · Not legal advice
← Interactive map

United States · US-020

Strike 3 Holdings v Meta

PLEADING SURVIVEDU.S. District Court for the Northern District of California25-cv-06213-EKLPending after motion-to-dismiss denial
Training Data AcquisitionSecondary / Contributory LiabilityEvidence / Burden of Proof

Key holding or allegation

The court held the alleged BitTorrent direct/vicarious/contributory infringement theories sufficient to proceed; proof that a film reached a model was not necessary to plead the alleged torrent infringement itself.

Why it matters

Reinforces separation between unlawful data acquisition and the later question of model training.

Facts

Plaintiff alleged Meta itself used BitTorrent to download and seed copyrighted films in connection with its AI data-acquisition activity.

Issues before the court

Whether direct, vicarious and contributory infringement based on alleged torrent conduct was adequately pleaded, including without proving each film reached a particular model.

What the court did not decide

Does not decide whether any later model training was fair use or whether the alleged torrent facts are ultimately true.

Procedural timeline

2026-06-11

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Motion-to-dismiss ruling: Alleged BitTorrent downloading and seeding by Meta sufficiently pleaded direct, vicarious and contributory infringement; proof that films reached a particular model was not necessary to plead the torrent infringement itself.

PLEADING SURVIVED