Strike 3 Holdings initiated a lawsuit against Meta in a U.S. district court in California on Friday, alleging Meta engaged in torrenting and seeding its copyrighted adult video content since at least 2018 to accelerate the download of other data for AI model training, according to an Ars Tecnica report.
Earlier in the year, book authors accused Meta of torrenting 81.7 terabytes of data from “shadow libraries” to train its AI models. Meta subsequently defeated most of these claims, asserting a lack of proof that it uploaded pirated data through seeding or leeching on the BitTorrent network. Despite this, the authors retain an opportunity to demonstrate that Meta may have profited from extensive piracy. The recent lawsuit filed by Strike 3 Holdings introduces evidence that could potentially support the authors’ ongoing litigation.
Strike 3 Holdings, which operates adult video websites, states its sites attract over 25 million monthly visitors and are recognized as “ethical sources” for adult videos, distinguished by their “Hollywood style and quality.” Following the disclosure of Meta’s alleged torrenting activities by the authors, Strike 3 Holdings reviewed its proprietary BitTorrent-tracking tools, which are designed to identify infringement of its video content. This review, according to Strike 3 Holdings, uncovered evidence indicating that Meta has been involved in torrenting and seeding its copyrighted material for an extended period, dating back to at least 2018. The filing specifies that some of the identified IP addresses were clearly registered to Meta, while others appeared to be “hidden.” Additionally, at least one IP address was linked to a Meta employee.
Strike 3 Holdings alleges that Meta “willfully and intentionally” infringed upon “at least 2,396 movies.” This action was part of a purported strategy to download terabytes of data rapidly by seeding popular, high-quality adult content. Meta allegedly continued seeding this content “sometimes for days, weeks, or even months” after the initial download. Strike 3 Holdings also suggested these movies might have been covertly utilized to train Meta’s AI models. The adult content provider explained to the court that the BitTorrent protocol functions on a “tit-for-tat” mechanism, rewarding users who distribute highly sought-after content. Meta is accused of exploiting this system by “often” pirating adult videos, which are “often within the most infringed files on BitTorrent websites,” frequently on the “very same day the motion pictures are released.” These alleged tactics provided Meta with several advantages, simultaneously hindering Strike 3 Holdings’ ability to compete. This includes the potential distribution of videos to minors without age verification, particularly in states that now mandate such checks.
The lawsuit explicitly states, “Meta specifically targeted Plaintiffs’ content for distribution in order to accelerate its downloads of vast amounts of other content.” While Meta previously claimed to have “wrote a script to intentionally limit distributing popular books on BitTorrent,” Strike 3 Holdings anticipates that “discovery will likely show” Meta “continuously” distributed its adult videos specifically as a strategy to circumvent the BitTorrent protocol’s inherent reciprocation mechanism. Strike 3 Holdings asserts it has documented at least five distinct instances where Meta “hand-picked” adult videos from a specific site for “intense periods of distribution” as a means to avoid seeding other content it was acquiring via BitTorrent.
Strike 3 Holdings further alleged that “The only reason to incur the server and bandwidth expense of remaining in a swarm for these long durations is to leverage the extended distribution as tit-for-tat currency in order to efficiently download millions of other files from BitTorrent.”
Strike 3 Holdings is seeking extensive damages and a permanent injunction to prevent Meta from continuing to pirate its videos. The company additionally demands that Meta delete any purportedly stolen videos from its AI training data and existing AI models. Strike 3 Holdings alleged that Meta could potentially employ its high-quality copyrighted works—characterized by “natural, human-centric imagery” featuring “parts of the body not found in regular videos” and “unique” forms of “human interactions and facial expressions”—to develop a rival adult video generator. Such a generator could “eventually create identical content for little to no cost.”
Strike 3 Holdings stated, “Plaintiffs cannot compete against Meta when it ignores federal and state laws and offers Plaintiffs’ works for free.” The company further alleged that this situation “will effectively eliminate Plaintiffs’ future ability to compete in the marketplace” and undermine its brands’ “hard-earned reputations as respected and ethical sources for high-quality adult motion pictures by potentially allowing minors unfettered access to Plaintiffs’ content against Plaintiffs’ consent.”
In response to inquiries regarding the lawsuit, a Meta spokesperson informed Ars, “We’re reviewing the complaint, but don’t believe Strike’s claims are accurate.”
To substantiate its copyright infringement claims, Strike 3 Holdings conducted a search of its “archive of recorded infringement captured by its VXN Scan and Cross Reference tools.” This search reportedly identified 47 “IP addresses identified as owned by Facebook infringing its copyright protected Works.” The data allegedly indicates “continued unauthorized distribution” spanning “several years.” Strike 3 Holdings claims that Meta did not cease its seeding activities even after being confronted with this evidence, despite the IP data reportedly being verified by Maxmind, an industry-leading provider.
The lawsuit further alleges that Meta attempted to “conceal its BitTorrent activities” through the use of “six Virtual Private Clouds,” which constituted a “stealth network” of “hidden IP addresses.” This claim suggests the involvement of a “major third-party data center provider” in Meta’s alleged piracy. An analysis of these IP addresses reportedly revealed “data patterns that matched infringement patterns seen on Meta’s corporate IP Addresses” and included “evidence of other activity on the BitTorrent network including ebooks, movies, television shows, music, and software.” The documented patterns on both sets of IP addresses are described as “non-human,” suggesting the data was intended for AI training rather than personal use, according to Strike 3 Holdings.
A Meta employee was previously noted to have stated, “torrenting from a corporate laptop doesn’t feel right.” Despite this, Strike 3 Holdings additionally alleged finding “at least one residential IP address of a Meta employee” engaged in infringing its copyrighted works. This suggests a possibility that Meta may have directed an employee to torrent pirated data using an off-site residential IP address to obscure the data trail. Strike 3 Holdings did not identify the specific employee or the major data center mentioned in its complaint. In a subsequent filing, the company acknowledged the potential risks to Meta’s business operations and its employees’ privacy if sensitive information were to be publicly shared.
In total, Strike 3 Holdings alleged that the available evidence demonstrates “well over 100,000 unauthorized distribution transactions” linked to Meta’s corporate IP addresses. Strike 3 Holdings aims for this evidence to lead a jury to find Meta liable for direct copyright infringement. Alternatively, if the jury determines that Meta successfully distanced itself from the alleged infringement by utilizing the third-party data center or an employee’s home IP address, Strike 3 Holdings seeks to charge Meta with secondary and vicarious copyright infringement.
The complaint asserts, “Meta has the right and ability to supervise and/or control its own corporate IP addresses, as well as the IP addresses hosted in off-infra data centers, and the acts of its employees and agents infringing Plaintiffs’ Works through their residential IPs by using Meta’s AI script to obtain content through BitTorrent.”
