In an update to a case highlighted last month by The American Lawyer, Fox Rothschild lawyers have voluntarily dismissed a complaint against a retired Washington state police officer who had been alleged, alongside more than a thousand other defendants across the country, of stealing pornography over the internet.

The copyright infringement claim filed in a Washington federal court was tabled Aug. 22 amidst an evidentiary dispute between Fox Rothschild's lawyers and a Hillsboro, Oregon-based defense attorney, J. Curtis Edmondson, court documents show.

J. Curtis Edmondson.

Fox Rothschild has filed more than 1,200 suits on behalf of Strike 3 Holdings, which holds the copyright to adult films produced by brands like “Vixen,” “Blacked” and “Tushy.” The cases are initially filed against IP addresses that Strike 3 claims a German company it retains has observed illegally downloading the films over BitTorrent networks. Strike 3 asked judges to order internet service providers (ISPs) such as AT&T Inc. or Comcast Corp. to turn over the names and contact information related to certain IP addresses. The cases then typically settle.

In large part thanks to Strike 3's campaign, copyright infringement claims are on pace this year to challenge an annual record. More than 4,100 copyright suits have been filed this year, which is already more than any year in the past decade other than 2015, when about 5,200 cases were brought, according to data analytics firm Lex Machina Inc.

The case in Washington involving a retired police officer stands out because it is rare that defendants retain lawyers to aggressively challenge such cases in court. Of the 627 complaints filed by Strike 3 that have concluded, Lex Machina estimates that 602—or 96 percent—likely resulted in a settlement. Edmondson had said he wanted to take the case to trial.

While Strike 3 has dismissed its claims without prejudice, the case involving the retired police officer, who is not identified by name in court documents, is not finished.

Edmondson has filed counterclaims against Strike 3 and is seeking a court judgment declaring that his client did not download the films. He is also seeking further information about the German investigative firm that Strike 3 relies on to file cases. He has argued that the evidence Strike 3 uses is not complete or reliable enough to prove that the alleged theft took place. Edmondson said in an interview Monday that the case's dismissal was unexpected.

“We don't ever want to be sued by Strike 3 again, so we have a right to have that adjudicated,” Edmondson said. “If they dismissed with prejudice, that might be a different story. But they've dismissed without prejudice, so that still leaves an open issue as to whether they'll come back and sue my [client] again.”

Lincoln Bandlow, the Fox Rothschild partner with the relationship with Strike 3, declined to discuss why the case was dismissed, but said he had “reason to believe” the alleged downloading was done by “someone connected to the defendant.”

“We are looking into it further in terms of who might actually be responsible here,” said Bandlow, who joined Fox Rothschild's Los Angeles office in 2015.

An email chain in the court docket showed Bandlow asking Edmondson if the lawyer represents the defendant's son. Bandlow declined to comment further when asked about that reference.

Lincoln Bandlow.

“The son appears to be a rampant infringer of copyright. And it is not just my client's works,” Bandlow wrote in an email. “And we shall see if the father was an infringer and/or was aware of the infringement and materially contributing to it.”

The episode also highlights what some law professors view as a problem with filing suits against IP addresses: The person who pays an internet bill is not the only person who can access the related IP address. That can lead to the wrong defendant being named in such cases.

In one instance, Strike 3 sued an unnamed 64-year-old legal secretary outside of Washington, D.C. In a court filing attempting to quash Strike 3's subpoena request, she said she had never downloaded any adult films or “authorized” anyone else to use her internet. She also said her 68-year-old husband did not know how to use computers or smartphones. Strike 3 fought the attempt to quash the subpoena.

“Although defendant claims she and her husband are not the infringers, she does not mention whether anyone else lives in the house or has access to the offending IP address,” Fox Rothschild associate Jessica Haire wrote in a court document. “The subpoenaed information would allow Strike 3 to investigate this claim and make an informed decision.”

The case was voluntarily dismissed by Strike 3 in June after lawyers representing the legal secretary said they were in negotiations to end the litigation. Deborah Lodge, a partner at Squire Patton Boggs in Washington, D.C., who represented the unnamed legal secretary, declined to comment on the case's resolution.

In a number of Strike 3 cases, Fox Rothschild lawyers have pushed back against defense lawyers characterizing their client as a “copyright troll.” The firm said that Los Angeles-based Strike 3 does not meet that definition because it produces actual content and does not rely on litigation to make money.

Earlier this month, Paul Hansmeier, who was part of perhaps the most infamous “copyright troll” scheme, Prenda Law, pleaded guilty to counts of money laundering and wire fraud. Sentencing guidelines in his plea agreement state that Hansmeier faces between 11 and 14 years in federal prison, with the charges carrying a maximum sentence of 20 years.