ACE Files Federal Copyright Lawsuits Against Alleged IPTV Operators: What Businesses Need to Know About the Outer Limits IPTV and Beast Mode Cases

ACE Continues Aggressive Campaign Against Illegal IPTV Streaming Services

The Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment ("ACE") continues to expand its nationwide enforcement campaign against operators of unauthorized IPTV streaming services. In March 2025, ACE members filed two significant federal copyright lawsuits targeting alleged operators of large-scale streaming platforms in California and Pennsylvania.

These cases demonstrate the entertainment industry's continued willingness to pursue not only website takedowns and cease-and-desist letters, but also federal litigation seeking substantial statutory damages, permanent injunctions, attorneys' fees, and the transfer of internet domains used to facilitate alleged copyright infringement.

If your business has received an investigation letter, subpoena, cease-and-desist notice, or federal lawsuit from ACE, the Motion Picture Association (MPA), or one of the major movie studios, understanding these cases can help you appreciate the legal issues involved and the importance of developing an informed defense strategy early in the process.

---

Who Is ACE?

The Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment (ACE) is the world's largest anti-piracy coalition. It is led by the Motion Picture Association (MPA) and represents many of the world's largest film studios, streaming services, and television companies.

ACE members include companies such as:

• Amazon

• Apple

• Disney

• Netflix

• Paramount

• Sony Pictures

• Universal Pictures

• Warner Bros.

• Columbia Pictures

ACE investigates unauthorized streaming operations throughout the world and frequently works with investigators, internet service providers, payment processors, domain registrars, and law enforcement agencies to identify alleged piracy operations.

Its enforcement efforts include:

• Federal copyright lawsuits

• Domain name seizures and transfers

• Permanent injunctions

• Settlement negotiations

• International enforcement actions

• Cooperation with criminal authorities in appropriate cases

---

The California Lawsuit: Outer Limits IPTV

The first lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

The defendants included:

• Zachary Adam-Layne DeBarr

• iLockSports LLC

• Ten unidentified Doe defendants

According to the complaint, the defendants allegedly operated:

• Outer Limits IPTV

• Outer Limits Hosting

The plaintiffs also alleged that the defendants resold subscriptions to additional IPTV services, including Nitro TV and Glitch TV.

What Did ACE Allege?

According to the complaint, subscribers allegedly received access to:

• More than 4,000 live television channels

• More than 13,000 movies

• More than 3,000 television series

ACE further alleged that the service was promoted through a YouTube channel with over 100,000 subscribers, while subscription packages were marketed for approximately $20 per month or $200 annually.

One interesting aspect of the complaint is the plaintiffs' effort to establish willful infringement. The studios alleged they began attempting to resolve the dispute as early as 2020 through telephone calls, emails, mailed correspondence, and personal contact. According to the complaint, the service temporarily went offline but later resumed operations despite those communications.

Those allegations are important because courts may consider evidence of continued infringement after notice when evaluating statutory damages.

---

The Pennsylvania Lawsuit: Beast Mode Live, Shrugs, and Zing

On the same day, ACE filed another lawsuit in the Middle District of Pennsylvania against Brandon Weibley and unidentified Doe defendants.

According to the complaint, Weibley allegedly operated a succession of IPTV services over several years, including:

• Beast Mode Live

• Viking Media

• BTV

• GreenWing Media

• Shrugs

• Zing

The complaint alleged that after receiving a cease-and-desist letter in December 2023, the operations moved to new domains while continuing to provide unauthorized streaming services.

ACE alleged these services offered subscribers access to:

• More than 9,000 television channels

• Movies

• Television programming

• International broadcasts

• Live sporting events

---

What Claims Did ACE Assert?

Although every case is unique, the complaints generally alleged that defendants engaged in unauthorized exploitation of copyrighted audiovisual works.

The lawsuits sought relief under the Copyright Act, including allegations involving:

• Unauthorized public performance of copyrighted programming

• Unauthorized reproduction of copyrighted works

• Contributory copyright infringement

• Vicarious copyright infringement

• Willful copyright infringement

The plaintiffs requested:

• Statutory damages under 17 U.S.C. § 504

• Permanent injunctions

• Attorneys' fees and litigation costs where available

• Transfer of domain names

• Other equitable relief deemed appropriate by the court

---

Why Statutory Damages Matter

One of the most significant aspects of copyright litigation is statutory damages.

Under the Copyright Act, plaintiffs may, in appropriate circumstances, seek statutory damages rather than proving actual economic losses. For willful infringement, statutory damages may reach up to $150,000 per copyrighted work, although courts retain substantial discretion in determining the appropriate amount based on the facts of each case.

For defendants, this means that early legal analysis and strategic decision-making can be extremely important.

---

The Pennsylvania Case Eventually Resulted in a $9 Million Judgment

The Pennsylvania litigation later resulted in a $9 million default judgment after the defendant failed to defend the lawsuit.

The court also entered:

• A permanent injunction;

• An order transferring piracy-related domain names to ACE; and

• Other relief consistent with the plaintiffs' requested remedies.

While a default judgment does not represent findings made after a contested trial, it illustrates the significant consequences that can follow when federal copyright litigation is ignored.

---

What These Cases Tell Us About ACE's Enforcement Strategy

These lawsuits reflect several continuing trends.

ACE Focuses on Commercial Operators

Rather than pursuing individual viewers, ACE continues targeting businesses and individuals alleged to operate subscription-based IPTV platforms.

Years of Investigation

The complaints suggest lengthy investigations involving online monitoring, domain analysis, communications with defendants, and documentation of alleged infringement before litigation was filed.

Domain Transfers Are Increasingly Common

ACE routinely seeks orders requiring piracy-related domains to be transferred or disabled, making it more difficult for operators to continue servicing existing subscribers.

Social Media Can Become Evidence

Public advertising through YouTube, Facebook, Discord, Telegram, websites, or other platforms may become evidence used by plaintiffs to establish the scope of alleged infringement and commercial activity.

---

What Should You Do If You Receive an ACE Demand Letter?

Receiving a cease-and-desist letter or federal complaint does not automatically mean the plaintiff will prevail on every issue. At the same time, ignoring the matter can significantly increase legal risk.

Depending on the circumstances, important questions may include:

• Does the court have personal jurisdiction?

• Who actually operated the service?

• What evidence links the defendant to the alleged conduct?

• What copyrighted works are specifically identified?

• Can the plaintiffs establish ownership or standing for each work?

• Are all asserted claims timely?

• What evidence supports allegations of willfulness?

• What defenses may be available under the Copyright Act or Federal Rules of Civil Procedure?

• Is an early negotiated resolution appropriate?

Every case turns on its own facts, and experienced legal counsel can help evaluate the available defenses and strategic options.

---

How Vondran Legal May Be Able to Help

Our firm has represented clients in numerous copyright and anti-piracy matters involving software, digital media, online content, and intellectual property disputes. We have also assisted clients in matters involving ACE investigations and related copyright enforcement efforts.

Our services may include:

• Evaluating ACE cease-and-desist letters

• Responding to federal copyright complaints

• Early case assessment and risk analysis

• Settlement negotiations

• Copyright litigation defense

• Motion practice in federal court

• Domain name and internet-related disputes

• Digital evidence review

• Discovery strategy

• Copyright counseling and compliance

• DMCA advice and online enforcement issues

• Representation in software licensing and piracy investigations

Because every case is different, we work closely with clients to develop a strategy tailored to the specific facts, legal issues, and business objectives involved.

---

Contact an ACE Copyright Defense Attorney

If your company has received a demand letter, subpoena, cease-and-desist notice, or federal copyright lawsuit from the Alliance for Creativity and Entertainment, the Motion Picture Association, or one of the major movie studios, obtaining experienced legal advice early can make a meaningful difference in evaluating your options.

Attorney Steve® and Vondran Legal have extensive experience handling complex copyright disputes, digital media litigation, software licensing matters, DMCA issues, and internet-related intellectual property cases throughout the United States.

If you are facing an ACE investigation or copyright lawsuit, contact us to discuss your situation and develop a strategy that protects your legal rights while positioning your case for the most favorable resolution possible.