How Strike 3's Lawsuit Could Expose Meta's AI Training Secrets. Strike 3 alleges it notified Meta’s attorneys and provided evidence, but Meta’s infringement continued.

Sued by the Stream: How Strike 3's Lawsuit Could Expose Meta's AI Training Secrets

by ChatGPT-4o

The lawsuit Strike 3 Holdings v. Meta Platforms, Inc. is a landmark copyright infringement case filed in July 2025. Strike 3, a producer of premium adult films, accuses Meta of systematically downloading and redistributing their copyrighted films via BitTorrent, including using the content to train Meta’s generative AI models such as Movie Gen and LLaMA 4. The complaint paints a picture of deliberate, large-scale infringement and misuse of adult content, raising broader implications for AI companies and rights holders alike.

a) List of Grievances Against Meta

1. Unauthorized Downloading and Distribution:

   • Meta allegedly used corporate and off-infrastructure IP addresses to download and distribute 2,396 copyrighted adult films owned by Strike 3 and its affiliate Counterlife Media.

   • Plaintiffs documented over 100,000 unauthorized distribution transactions by Meta.

2. Use for AI Training:

   • Meta purportedly used these pirated films to train multimodal AI systems like Movie Gen and LLaMA 4 without permission.

3. Intentional Obfuscation:

   • Meta allegedly concealed torrenting activities using virtual private clouds (VPCs) and hidden IP addresses to avoid detection and attribution.

4. Commercial Exploitation:

   • The plaintiffs claim that Meta’s infringement was aimed at accelerating downloads of other content for AI training, effectively treating copyrighted films as “currency” in the BitTorrent ecosystem.

5. Distribution to Minors:

   • Meta’s BitTorrent distribution bypassed age verification laws, potentially exposing minors to adult content.

6. Ongoing Infringement After Notice:

   • Strike 3 alleges it notified Meta’s attorneys and provided evidence, but Meta’s infringement continued.

7. Reputational and Market Harm:

   • The plaintiffs argue Meta's conduct damages their brand reputation, undermines ethical content creation, and threatens their future market viability.

b) Assessment of the Quality of Arguments and Evidence

The complaint is unusually detailed and technically sophisticated. Key strengths include:

• Extensive Forensic Evidence: Strike 3 provides packet captures (PCAP files), IP address logs, BitTorrent metadata, and detailed exhibits showing coordinated infringement from Meta-owned and stealth IPs.

• Cross-Referenced Internal Meta Conduct: The complaint leverages disclosures from the separate Kadrey v. Meta case, showing internal acknowledgment at Meta of using torrents and attempting to hide such activities.

• Clear Copyright Ownership: All works at issue were registered with the U.S. Copyright Office, a crucial prerequisite for statutory damages.

However, the complaint is:

• Unproven at This Stage: The allegations are one-sided and remain untested in court.

• Emotionally Charged: Phrases like “Meta’s selfish purposes” and references to “fantasy sex” training skew toward rhetorical flourish.

• Limited by Secrecy: Critical technical evidence (e.g., Exhibit B and C) is under seal, preventing public verification.

c) What Meta and Other AI Makers Should Be Doing

To prevent situations like this:

1. Audit and Document All Training Data:

   • AI companies must maintain robust data provenance records, especially for non-public or potentially infringing content.

2. License Rather Than Ingest Illegally Obtained Content:

   • If high-quality data is required (including adult material), AI firms should negotiate licensing deals that respect copyright and ethical boundaries.

3. Avoid BitTorrent and Pirate Sources Entirely:

   • Using BitTorrent, particularly via obfuscated methods, invites both legal and reputational risk.

4. Internal Oversight and Compliance:

   • Firms should implement AI ethics committees, legal review protocols, and strict policies against “off-infra” activity.

5. Respond Promptly to Rights Holder Complaints:

   • Meta reportedly ignored cease-and-desist-like notifications. Swift action would have mitigated damages and demonstrated good faith.

To address the current situation:

• Cease all infringing activity immediately, including any AI model training involving unlicensed adult content.

• Disclose relevant internal documents voluntarily or through negotiated settlement.

• Engage in confidential mediation with Strike 3 to explore licensing or monetary resolution.

• Establish an independent audit of LLaMA and Movie Gen training sets to ensure lawful data usage.

• Publicly commit to ethical AI practices, including respecting age-restricted content and implementing content filtering mechanisms.

d) Implications for Other Litigants and Rights Holders

If successful, Strike 3 v. Meta could provide:

1. A Legal Blueprint:

   • The lawsuit offers a technical and procedural playbook for identifying and litigating against large-scale AI-driven copyright infringement.

2. Evidence of a Pattern at Meta:

   • Plaintiffs in other lawsuits (e.g., Kadrey, New York Times, Getty, etc.) may cite the pattern of behavior alleged here—covert torrenting, use of “off-infra” systems, etc.

3. Ammunition for Proving Willfulness:

   • Meta’s use of stealth IPs and continued infringement after notice strengthens arguments for willful infringement and higher statutory damages.

4. Broader Regulatory and Policy Pressure:

   • The case could influence how regulators and courts define fair use, data laundering, and derivative AI outputs in adult content and beyond.

5. Application to Other Sectors:

   • Rights holders in music, video, research, and even software can adapt Strike 3’s anti-piracy and detection methodologies, like the VXN Scan system and DHT tracking, for their own enforcement.

Conclusion

Strike 3 v. Meta is more than a niche copyright case—it raises foundational questions about how Big Tech sources data, the ethics of AI training, and the rights of creators in an era of synthetic reproduction. Whether Strike 3 prevails or not, the case may redefine digital copyright enforcement and compel greater transparency and restraint in AI model development. Meta—and its peers—ignore these signals at their peril.