![\"one](\"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/onepiecelo-600x600.jpg\")
To combat online piracy, copyright holders frequently use DMCA subpoenas to compel service providers to unmask alleged infringers. <\/p>\nTo combat online piracy, copyright holders frequently use DMCA subpoenas to compel service providers to unmask alleged infringers. <\/p>\n
Because these requests don\u2019t require a judge\u2019s approval and are typically signed off by a court clerk, they offer a swift and powerful tool to identify pirates.<\/p>\n
In recent years, Internet infrastructure company Cloudflare has been targeted with DMCA subpoenas dozens of times. While the personal information it discloses may not always be accurate, it has been instrumental in several enforcement actions.<\/p>\n
In some instances, the mere threat of potential legal trouble may already be sufficient. This was the case a few months ago when the massively popular manga piracy site Mangajikan.com shut its doors<\/a> days after publisher Shueisha obtained a DMCA subpoena directed at Cloudflare.<\/p>\n While Shueisha must have been pleased with the quick result, the publisher still didn\u2019t know who was running the site. Shortly after Shueisha obtained the DMCA subpoena, the anonymous operator of mangajikan.com and related domain alammanga.com, submitted a motion to quash at a California federal court. <\/p>\n The \u2018John Doe\u2019 operator\u2019s motion to quash cited several reasons why disclosure of their personal data should be denied. This includes the Cox precedent<\/a> confirmed by the Court of Appeals in August<\/a>, which held that DMCA subpoenas don\u2019t apply to Section 512(a)<\/em> service providers, i.e mere conduits that simply pass on bytes.<\/p>\n \u201cCloudflare is not a proper DMCA target in this instance because here, it only provides DNS and CDN services to the Domains and cannot remove or disable access to content,\u201d Doe\u2019s attorney explained. <\/p>\n \u201c[F]ederal courts have repeatedly held that DMCA subpoenas cannot compel disclosure from service providers acting solely as conduits or CDNs, as they do not host or control the allegedly infringing content.\u201d<\/p>\n The non-hosting argument appears to align with Cloudflare\u2019s own policy. The company does not disable access to allegedly infringing URLs that use its CDN service because it doesn\u2019t host the content permanently. Instead, Cloudflare forwards DMCA notices to the affected subscribers.<\/p>\n In its response, Shueisha pointed out that since Cloudflare temporarily stores the contested materials in its cache and then serves the content to the site\u2019s visitors, Cloudflare qualifies as a Section 512(c)<\/em> service.<\/p>\n The manga publisher backed up its claim by simply submitting a screenshot from Cloudflare\u2019s own website describing how its cache \u201cstores copies of frequently accessed content.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cCloudflare does, in fact, store content on its servers in the form of cached data which allows for faster loading of sites. Courts, particularly in this district, routinely issue DMCA subpoenas to Cloudflare that Cloudflare does not move to quash,\u201d Shueisha argued.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Shueisha further argued that the pirate site\u2019s operator failed to cite a single case in which Cloudflare was seen as an \u201cimproper recipient\u201d of a DMCA subpoena in this context. <\/p>\n In addition to the disagreement over the correct application of a DMCA subpoena, the operator argued that a U.S. court is not the right venue. In a declaration, they explained that Mangajikan.com allegedly blocked U.S. visitors, had a non-commercial nature, and has already been shut down.<\/p>\n The underlying DMCA notice is also invalid, they argued, because it didn\u2019t properly identify the infringing content and failed to take fair use into account. <\/p>\n Finally, the John Doe operator asked the court for a protective order to shield his identity, noting that he feared retaliation since Shueisha had released personal details of adversaries in the past. <\/p>\n These additional arguments were contested by Shueisha. Crucially, the publisher said that since their declaration was submitted anonymously, the operator can\u2019t be held to the standard of \u201cpenalty of perjury\u201d so should be ignored.<\/p>\n Other defenses, such as fair use claims, do not need to be considered for a motion to quash, the publisher added.<\/p>\n After reviewing the filings from both sides, the court ultimately sided with the manga publisher.<\/p>\n Firstly, Judge Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Shueisha sufficiently identified a copyrighted work. In addition, its takedown notice included the required statement of good faith belief that Mangajikan\u2019s use was unauthorized.<\/p>\n Finally, the court found that Cloudflare is not a mere conduit service provider under Section 512(a), as it stores cached content. Siding with Shueisha\u2019s argument that Cloudflare functioned as a Section 512(c) service provider, the Court confirmed that a DMCA subpoena can be used. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n \u201cThe parties offer limited evidence to demonstrate what functions Cloudflare performed for Doe\u2019s websites. Still, Shueisha has made a prima facie showing that Cloudflare stores content on its servers in the form of cached data to support faster loading of sites.\u201d <\/p>\n \u201cBecause there is no evidence to the contrary, the Court accepts Shueisha\u2019s prima facie showing and concludes that Cloudflare functioned as a Section 512(c) service provider,\u201d Judge Gonzalez Rogers added. <\/p>\n Interestingly, the order didn\u2019t mention Section 512(b), which specifically references caching. That likely wouldn\u2019t have changed the outcome, however, as DMCA subpoenas also apply to these services. <\/p>\n Cloudflare likely sees itself as a caching service in relation to its CDN services, as it typically does not remove cached content, unlike content that it hosts permanently. Therefore, the court\u2019s ruling here should be seen as limited to this particular case. <\/p>\n For Mangajikan\u2019s operator, the ruling effectively means that their battle for anonymity is over. However, the court did order the parties to create a protective order, which will limit how Shueisha can use Doe\u2019s identity, particularly in public. <\/p>\n \u2014<\/em><\/p>\n A copy of U.S. District Court Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers\u2019 order is available here (pdf)<\/p>\n From: TF<\/a>, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.<\/p>\nAnonymous Operator Relies on Cox Precedent<\/h2>\n
Shueisha Counters: Caching is Key<\/h2>\n
![\"cache\"](\"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/cache-store.jpg\")
<\/center> <\/p>\nJurisdiction, Fair Use, and Retaliation<\/h2>\n
Court: Caching Qualifies for a DMCA Subpoena<\/h2>\n
![\"court's](\"https:\/\/www.cryptocabaret.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/courtanalysis.jpg\")
<\/center> <\/p>\nDMCA: A, B, C\u2026<\/h2>\n