Two Federal Judges Split on Take-Two DMCA Subpoenas in One Week

Take-Two Interactive filed four miscellaneous applications in the Southern District of New York in August, each asking a judge to sign a subpoena unmasking accounts it says are linked to the Grand Theft Auto VI leak. Same court, same applicant, same week, four dockets. Two judges reached opposite answers. On 24 August one granted the subpoena against X Corp. The same day, another refused to sign the one aimed at Google and asked Take-Two how it had identified the accounts at all. A week later he closed that case without ever granting it. The corrected docket map CONFIRMED, from CourtListener docket pages read in full. This corrects our own earlier reporting, which treated Microsoft and GitHub as separate matters. They are one docket: Microsoft is the subpoena recipient because the underlying notice was served on GitHub. DocketJudgeSubpoena targetUnderlying notice exhibitCounselStatus 1:26-mc-00421Jennifer L. RochonMicrosoft Corporation"Exhibit 1 - Github DMCA Notice"Dale M. CendaliGranted 21 Aug, terminated 21 Aug 1:26-mc-00422Andrew L. Carter Jr.Discord, Inc."Exhibit 1 - DMCA Takedown Notices to Discord"Dale M. CendaliGranted 21 Aug, second request 28 Aug, granted again 31 Aug 1:26-mc-00425John P. CronanGoogle LLC"Exhibit 1 - DMCA Takedown Notice to YouTube"Rachel BandliClosed 31 Aug, never granted 1:26-mc-00426Analisa N. TorresX Corp."Exhibit 1 - DMCA Takedown Notice to X Corp."Rachel BandliGranted 24 Aug, docket still open What Judge Torres signed on 24 August CONFIRMED, verbatim from docket 26-mc-00426, entry 5. The missing space in the caption is in the docket text itself and is reproduced exactly: ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE, INC.'SREQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUBPOENA TO X CORP.:This matter comes before the Court upon the ex parte application of petitioner Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. along with the Declaration of Rachel Bandli and supporting documents for the signing of a Subpoena directing X Corp. to produce the identity of entities or persons believed to be infringing on the copyright of Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. ... the Court finds good reason to issue an order directing the clerk to issue said subpoena What Judge Cronan wrote the same day CONFIRMED, verbatim from docket 26-mc-00425, entry 5, with one redaction. The docket entry quotes a URL pointing at unauthorised material. Our researcher redacted it at the point of reading, this desk is not reproducing it, and we are not describing what it points to. MEMO ENDORSEMENT ... ENDORSEMENT: Petitioner has not provided any information as to how it identified the online personas that it seeks to subpoena from Google, including its basis for believing that those users are associated with the posting of [URL REDACTED]. Petitioner shall promptly supplement its application with any further information. SO ORDERED (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 8/24/2026) Take-Two filed a Response on 28 August, entry 6. On 31 August Cronan issued entry 7, verbatim and in its entirety: MEMO ENDORSEMENT on re: 6 Response filed by Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. ENDORSEMENT: The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate all pending motions and to close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John P. Cronan on 8/31/2026) There is no order granting issuance on that docket. The case was closed. The YouTube route failed while the X, Discord and GitHub routes succeeded. The Discord docket's blank entry is no longer blank CONFIRMED, and it updates what this desk published on 3 September. Our piece on the blank docket entry 10 and the sealing letter recorded entry 10 on the Discord matter as carrying no text. It is now populated. Verbatim: ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE, INC.'S SUBPOENA TO DISCORD, INC. ... ORDERED that the clerk of this Court shall issue the Subpoena for Discord, Inc. as sought by the petitioner. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 8/31/2026) Also on that docket: entry 6, "LETTER MOTION to Seal addressed to Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. from Dale M. Cendali dated August 28, 2026", and entry 8, "***SEALED***NOTICE of Sealed Version of Exhibit A". Entry 7's Exhibit A is marked the "Public Redacted Version". Two judges, one week, two standards Set the two orders side by side. Judge Torres found "good reason to issue an order directing the clerk to issue said subpoena" on an ex parte application supported by a declaration. Judge Cronan, on an application from the same company, through the same firm, in the same courthouse, wanted to know how the applicant had worked out who the accounts belonged to before he would sign anything. He never got an answer that satisfied him, and the docket closed one week later. That is the first judicial pushback on this leak-hunt anywhere in the public record, and it is quotable. It is also a reminder of what a DMCA subpoena is: an unmasking order issued without the account holder being heard. One judge treated that as routine and one did not. Smaller documentary details, each checked Each docket's Rule 7.1 statement identifies "Other Affiliate BlackRock, Inc." for Take-Two. Each filing fee is $52.00. On dockets 421 and 422 the clerk captioned the subpoena order "ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE, INC.'S RULE 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT", which is the wrong caption for the order's own body. Nothing has moved on any of the four dockets since 31 August. That is 15 days as of today. Method limits The CourtListener REST API returned 429 with a throttle message, so the work was done through the HTML search and the docket pages, all of which returned 200 at between 88,525 and 121,638 bytes. CourtListener's RECAP coverage is contributor-driven. Absence of an entry is weaker evidence than presence of one. A sealed or later order on the Google docket that has not been ingested would change the picture, and this desk did not open PACER to check. No leaked material was viewed, described, quoted or linked at any point. The single leak-pointing URL in the Cronan endorsement was redacted by the researcher who read it and appears nowhere in our files. What is and is not established CONFIRMED: four SDNY dockets, targeting Microsoft for a GitHub notice, Discord, Google for a YouTube notice, and X Corp. CONFIRMED: Judge Torres granted the X Corp subpoena on 24 August. Judge Cronan issued a memo endorsement the same day asking how Take-Two identified the online personas, and closed the Google case on 31 August without granting it. CONFIRMED: the previously blank entry 10 on the Discord docket is now a granting order signed 31 August. CORRECTS OUR OWN RECORD: Microsoft and GitHub are one docket, 1:26-mc-00421, not two. Three subpoenas were granted, not four. Explicitly not claimed: anything about who the accounts belong to, what was posted, or where. Nothing in the underlying material was examined by anyone on this desk. Every primary document this desk has read on the leak-hunt thread is logged on the wiki, with the rest of today's reporting on the news desk. The servers list and the leaderboards are open for the next 65 days.