See e.g., Nexon Korea Corporation v. Ironmace Co. Ltd, No. 23-576-TL, 2023 WL 5305996 at * 3 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 17, 2023) (“Ironmace submitted a DMCA counternotification to Valve and consequently consented to the jurisdiction of the Western District of Washington, where Valve's headquarters are located.”); Epic Games, Inc. v. Mendes, 2018 WL 2926086 at * 5 (N.D. Cal. June 12, 2018) (“The court has personal jurisdiction over Mr. Rak because he submitted a DMCA counter-notification in which he expressly stated that he “consent[s] to the jurisdiction of the Federal District Court for the district in which my address is located, or if my address is outside of the United States, the judicial district in which YouTube is located[.]”). Here, Defendant filed a DMCA counter-notification to Plaintiff's report to Amazon of a copyright violation that contains the mandatory language contained in 17 U.S.C. § 512(g)(3)(D), i.e., that if Defendant's address is outside of the United States, Defendant consents to the jurisdiction in any judicial district in which Amazon may be found.
” See, e.g., Epic Games, Inc. v. Mendes, No. 17-cv-6223, 2018 WL 2926086, at *5 (N.D. Cal. June 12, 2018); Shropshire v. Canning, No. 10-cv-1941, 2011 WL 90136, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2011). Furthermore, Plaintiff provides no authority and the Court finds none holding that internet-based service providers are “located” in any judicial district with access to the internet.
Finally, Astral cites to authorities that have adopted this approach. For example, in Epic Games, Inc. v. Mendes, No. 17-cv-06223-LB, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98719 (N.D. Cal. June 12, 2018), the plaintiff sued several individuals for software cheats that allowed players to modify Fortnite to give themselves advantages over other players. The plaintiff sought a default judgment against one of the individuals, Mr. Rak.
As such, the Court finds that Defendants consented to personal jurisdiction.”); Epic Games, Inc. v. Mendes, No. 17-cv-06223, 2018 WL 2926086, at *5 (N.D. Cal. June 12, 2018) (“YouTube is located in the Northern District of California.
Several courts in this Circuit have found that, under the DMCA, a counternotification serves as consent to personal jurisdiction only. E.g., Epic Games, Inc. v. Mendes, No. C17-6223, 2018 WL 2926086, at *5 (N.D. Cal. June 12, 2018) (finding that defendant consented to personal jurisdiction in the Northern District of California because he submitted an express statement along with the counter-notification); Melendez v. Vaiana, No. EDCV162516JGBSPX, 2017 WL 8183139, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 19, 2017) (same); Tecnologias Avanzadas RD, SRL v. Riegler, No. C16-6701, 2017 WL 2772301, at *2 (N.D. Cal. June 1, 2017) (same); accord Real v. Matteo, No. C17-1288, 2018 WL 493596, at *5 (W.D. La. Jan. 3, 2018), report and recommendation adopted, 2018 WL 494271 (W.D. La. Jan. 19, 2018); Wright v. Edwards, No. C21-6063, 2022 WL 17820247, at *6 (E.D.N.Y. July 18, 2022). The DMCA therefore does not preclude application of the doctrine of forum non conveniens and dismissal is appropriate if the Court finds that an adequate foreign forum exists and the balance of interests weighs in favor of the more convenient forum.
The federal district "in which YouTube is located" is most reasonably understood to be the Northern District of California, the district containing YouTube's San Bruno, California headquarters, which is the address listed on the counternotices. See id.; Epic Games, Inc. v. Mendes, No. 17-CV-06223-LB, 2018 WL 2926086, at *5 (N.D. Cal. June 12, 2018) (holding that a by submitting a YouTube counternotice, in which a foreign defendant consented to the jurisdiction of "the judicial district in which YouTube is located," he consented to personal jurisdiction in the Northern District of California); Crunchyroll, Inc. v. Pledge, No. C 11-2334 SBA, 2014 WL 1347492, at *9 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 31, 2014) (same).