Courts have historically balanced the interests of copyright and new technology, but the standard for allowing defendants in file-sharing copyright actions to be identified, or “unmasked,” must be raised to comply with the First Amendment, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence. Recently, file-sharing software use has become more prevalent, creating tension with copyright interests. This tension resulted in massive litigation, which led to Digital Millennium Copyright Act subpoenas and, more recently, John Doe suits. With this increased litigation comes the problem of when courts can unmask defendants. This Article argues that the standard for allowing defendants to be unmasked is too low and should be raised to require both personal jurisdiction and a plausible basis for relief from the defendant to be identified.