Petroliam Nasional Berhad v. GoDaddy.com, Inc.
Filing
124
Declaration of Nima Kelly in Support of 119 Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and Appendix in Support filed byGoDaddy.com, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Greg Schwimer ISO Plaintiff's Administrative Motion to Seal, # 2 Proposed Order, # 3 Exhibit A Part 1 to Proposed Order, # 4 Exhibit A Part 2 to Proposed Order, # 5 Exhibit A Part 3 to Proposed Order, # 6 Exhibit A Part 4 to Proposed Order, # 7 Exhibit A Part 5 to Proposed Order, # 8 Exhibit A Part 6 to Proposed Order, # 9 Exhibit A Part 7 to Proposed Order)(Related document(s) 119 ) (Slafsky, John) (Filed on 11/9/2011)
APP149
APP150
APP151
Red
acted
MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Red acted
ASSISTING
KELLY LEWIS
Red
PetronasTowers.net
government.
Site
law
suit
just forwarding
to
possible
is
simply
pending
with
the
porn
acted
Malaysian
site.
Red acted
APP152
CONFIDENTIAL
GD-OO1 899
Red acted
APP153
CONFIDENTIAL
GD-001 900
Red acted
Joseph
Hanyen
Abuse
Department
Content
Manager
GoDaddy.com
Spam and Abuse
Department
480-505-8897
ægodaddy.com
jhanyen
Please
contact
my
direct
supervisor
at
bbutler
godaddy.com
with
any
feedback.
APP154
CONFIDENTIAL
GD-001 901
Red acted
From
John
Slafsky
Sent
RE
Petronas/GoDaddy
CONFIDENTIALAND
Perry
e-mail
could
federal
now
FURNISHED
messages
have
court
Your
that
RULE
OF EVIDENCE
408
with
below
on
now
court
are
clients
22
need
in
which
case
exchange
to
If
Initial
would
interested
to
We
Disclosures.
in
you
control
violation
via
days
court
domain
the
in
domain
the
FRCP
of
pursuing
Conference
Management
expect
though
60
federal
Rule
name
UDRP
well-known
December
name
and
you
arbitration
even
each
though
of
to
bring
claims
your
small
for
process
chose
subsequently
fraction
the
against
the
of
in
separate
in
required
court
doomed.
are
registrar
fees
federal
attorney
lawsuit
rem
This
of
and
has
11.
infringers
it
can
either
UDRP
bring
claims
or
can
sue
by
it
the
July
in
infringers
court.
is
It
absurd
to
burden.
policing
Case
we
is
in
registrar
blatant
in
within
client
your
the
even
registrar
client
your
for
against
GoDaddy
registrar
trademark
concerning
stipulation
July
the
name
motion
the
against
litigation
for
TRO
futile
bring
unacceptable.
your
domain
petronastower
to
expense
assume
proposed
will
federal
unnecessary
registrar
however
parties
opted
demands
the
disturbing.
you
and
forwarded
available
The
TO FEDERAL
disputed
proceeding
settlement
suggest
very
the
Instead
easily
significant
are
today
secured
litigation.
are
you
caused
You
PURSUANT
--
Your
You
PM
clark
perry
Subject
14 2010 215
June
Monday
To
Case
file
that
propose
on
the
parties
that
and
July15
Management
do
GoDaddy
this
by
submission
joint
Statement
July
8.
15
one
i.e.
Case
of
Please
by July
week
before
Statement
Management
forward
another
Case
the
with
stipulation
these
These
1.
Conference.
Management
dates
do
work
not
for
We
are
to
us.
this
dates.
Please
confirm
agreement
your
deadline.
the
Case
against
both
At
John
Conference
Management
and
you
intend
we
Under
client.
your
the
to
advise
Hamilton
Judge
circumstances
GoDaddy
is
committed
to
will
be
proceeding
moving
with
the
to
dismiss
sanctions
this
case
motion
altogether
even
you
if
and
ii
for
moving
elect
subsequently
sanctions
to
dismiss
including
this
an
baseless
award
attorney-fee
and
ill-advised
lawsuit.
Slafsky
Wilson
Sonsini
Goodrich
650 Page
Mill
Palo
CA
Alto
Rosati
Road
94304
650-320-4574
ph
650-493-6811
fax
jslafskywsgr.com
From
Sent
To
Clark
Perry
1013
AM
John
Slafsky
Subject
14 2010
June
Monday
Petronas/GoDaddy
CONFIDENTIALAND
FURNISHED
PURSUANT
TO FEDERAL
RULE
OF EVIDENCE
408
John
It
has
to our
come
attention
that
domain
PETRONASTOWERS.NET
website
name
is
mirroring
registered
at
the
website
previously
GoDaddy.com
as
was
associated
the
with
PETRONASTOWER.NET
the
PETRONASTOWER.NET
domain
name
domain
the
Court
name
ordered
is
located
transferred
at
PETRONASTOWERS.NET.
to Petronas.
The
It
appears
registrant
also
that
the
appears
to
be
the
same.
Could
if
please
you
your
let
would
client
me
know
consider
whether
agreeing
your
client
to inform
would
Petronas
be
in
willing
the
to transferthe
future
when
PETRONASTOWERS.NET
GoDaddy
receives
an
application
domain
name
to register
to
Petronas
domain
and
name
on
using
what
the
terms
and
PETRONAS
conditions.
In
addition
please
let
me
know
mark.
Best
Perry
Law
Offices
of Perry
3457 Cowper
Palo
Tel.
Alto
R.
Clark
St.
CA 94306
6502485817
APP155
CONFIDENTIAL
GD-001 930
Case4:09-cv-05939-PJH
Document38 Filed05/13110
Pagel of2
PerryR. Clark, Esq.
1 Law Officesof PerryR. Clark
2 1245Hamilton Avenue
PaloAlto , CA 94301
3 Telephone:(650) 248-5817
Facsimile:(650)248-5816
4 p erry@perrycarklaw.com
I
5 Attorney for Plaintiff
6 PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD
7
8
LTNITED
STATESDISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERNDISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
OAKLAND DIVISION
1 l PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD.
CASENO: 09-CV-5939
PJH
t2
Date:April 28,2010
Time:9:00a.m.
Location:Courtroom3
Third Floor
Plaintiff.
13
vs.
t 4 GODADDY.COM,fNC.,
15
Defendant.
l6
17
18
PJH
CASENO: 10-CV-0043 Ervfe
I
PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD,
Plaintiff.
t9
VS.
20
PETRONASTOWER.NET. internetdomain
an
2 l name.
22
Defendant.
23
24
25
ORDER TRANSFERRING DOMAIN NAME
TFROFO'SED]
PURSUAI\T TO 15 U.S.C.$ 1125(D)
26
27
28
[PROPOSED] ORDER TRANSFERRING DOMAIN
Case
Nos: 09-CV-5939
PJH and 10-CV00431
EMC
APP156
Case4:09-cv-05939-PJH
Document3S FiledO5/13110
Page2of2
I
The undersigned reviewedPlaintiff Petronas's
has
Motion for OrderTransferring
2 DomainNamePursuant 15U.S.C.$ 1125(D)and for Entry of Judgment.For the reasons
to
set
J
4
5
6
forth in that motion, the Court herebyordersas follows:
l. GoDaddy.com, shalltransfer internetdomain"petronastower.net"
Inc.
the
to
Plaintiff Petronas
within ten (10) daysof this order;and
2. GoDaddy.com, shallprovidePlaintiff Petronas
Inc.
within ten (10) daysof this
7
order all information certiffing the transferof the domainname andany
8
informationthat Plaintiff Petronas
may needto useand maintainthat domain
9
name,includingany informationcertiffing ownership the domainname.
of
10
Shouldeither party wish to modiff the timing for the transferor makeadditionalchanges
1 1 to this orderregardingthe technicaldetailsof the domainnametransfer,the Court ordersthe
l 2 parties meetandconferwithin (10) daysandsubmita modifiedproposed
to
orderfor the Court's
1 3 review. The partiesmay alsosubmita joint letternot to exceed pagesexplaining
the
two
changes any disputes parties
and
t 4 proposed
the
may haveregarding
thosechanges.
15
t6
SO ORDERED:
t7
Date: 5l13lI0
18
t9
)l l- nW ;'r--
20
wy
w
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDERTRANSFERRING
DOMAIN NAME
IPROPOSED]
Nos: 09-CV-5939 and10-CV00431
Case
PJH
EMC
APP157
I l<
Case4:10-cv-00431-PJH
DocumentT Filed03/25l10Pagel of 43
PerryR. Clark, Esq.
Law Officesof PerryR. Clark
1245Hantilton Avenue
PaloAlto, CA 94301
Telephone:(650) 248-5817
Facsimile:(650)248-5816
perry
I
@perrycarklaw.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD
UNITED STATESDISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION
)
PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD,
CASENO: 09-CV-5939
PJH
)
)
Date:April 28,2010
Plaintiff.
)
Time:9:00a.m.
)
vs.
Location:Courtroom3
)
Third Floor
GODADDY.COM,fNC.,
Defendant.
PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD.
EMC
CASENO: 10-CV-00431
Plaintiff.
VS.
PETRONASTOWER.NET. internetdomain
an
name,
Defendant.
NOTICE OF MOTION AI\D
MOTION FOR ORDER TRANSFERRING DOMAIN NAME
PURSUAT\TTO ls U.S.C.$ 112s(D)AND
FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT
UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF STIPALATED ORDER REI-ATING CASES
PENDING
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER TRANSFERRING DOMAIN NAME PTJRSUANTTO 15
u.s.c. $ 1125(D)
AND FORENTRYOFJUDGMENT
Case
Nos: 09-CV-5939 and10-CV00431
PJH
EMC
APP158
-PJH DocumentT Filed03/25/1 Page2of 43
Case4:1
0-cv-00431
0
1
I.
2
a
J
NOTICE OF MOTION
TO ALL PARTIESAND COUNSELOF RECORD:Please
takenoticethatpursuant
to
Civil Local Rule 7-11 Plaintiff Petroliam
hereby
NasionalBerhad("Plaintiff'or "Petronas")
motion for an ordertransferringthe domainname"petronastower.net"
4 makesthis unopposed
to
pursuant l5 U.S.C.$ 1125(D)andfor entryofjudgment.
to
5 Plaintiff Petronas
6
It
7
STATEMENT OF RELIIEF REQUESTED
Plaintiff Petronas
requests this Court issuean orderdirectingGoDaddy.Com, to
that
Inc.
the
pursuant l5 U.S.C.$
8 transfer domainname"petronastower.net" Plaintiff Petronas
to
to
judgmentin Petronas's
furtherrequests orderentering
9 1125(D). Plaintiff Petronas
favor in
an
1 0 this action. Counselfor GoDaddyhasinformed counselfor Petronas GoDaddyis not taking
that
ll
anypositionwith respect this motion. On January
to
25,2010,Plaintiff Petronas
informedthe
providedGoDaddyand
t 2 registrantof the "petronastower.net"
domainof this action atthe address
by
1 3 asrequired 15U.S.C.$ 1125(D).Ex.A. Petronas previously
had
triedto contact
the
regardingthe "petronastower.net"
t 4 registrantby mail, email, and telephone
domainname.Ex. _ at
1 5 3:8-19 and26-30. Petronas not received communication
has
any
from the registrant of the
as
t 6 dateof this motion. Plaintiff Petronas unawareof any otherpersonor entity that does,or
is
t 7 would, oppose motion.
the
t8
t9
III.
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
The "petronastower.net"
domainnameshouldbe transferred Plaintiff Petronas
to
under
20 the Anticyberpiracy
sectionof the LanhamTrademark
Act, 15U.S.C.$ 1125(D),
because
there
2l
is no disputethat all threeof the requirements the Anticyberpiracysectionare met. First, the
of
22 domainname'opetronastower.net"
infringesPlaintiff Petronas's
federallyregistered
trademark
23 for the mark "PETRONAS." Second,
Plaintiff Petronas beenunableto find the person
has
who
24 registered "petronastower.net"
the
domainnameor obtain in personamjurisdictionover that
25 person. Third, the intemet registrar-GoDaddy-of the domainname"petronastower.net"
has
26
27
28
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER TRANSFERRING DOMAIN NAME PURSUANT TO 15
u.s.c. lr25(D)
$
AND FORENTRYOF ruDGMENT
Case
Nos: 09-CV-5939 and10-CV00431
PJH
EMC
APP159
Page3of 43
DocumentT Filed03/25/10
Case4:10-cv-00431-PJH
I
providedthe informationrequired 15 U.S.C.$ 1125(d)(2XDXi)
which certifiesthat this Court
by
2 hasthe control and authorityto transferthe domainname.
ProceduralPostureand RelatedCase
J
A.
4
Plaintiff Petronas
filed two actionsin the NorthernDistrict relatedto the
5
motionto relatethe two actionson
domainnameandfiled an unopposed
"petronastower.net"
6
(09-5939
PJH)wasfiled
March24,2010. Ex. B (Docket
No. 31). This actionagainst
GoDaddy
7
Petronas's
GoDaddy.com
first andconcerns
allegations
that,amongotherthings,Defendant
8
indirectly infringes the "PETRONAS" mark by maintainingthe registrationof the
9
domainnamewith actualknowledgethat the domainnameinfringesthe
"petronastower.net"
1 0 trademarkrights of Petronas.
11
l2
filed the second
sectionof
Petronas
actionasan in rem actionunderthe Anticyberpiracy
the LanhamTrademarkAct againstthe "petronastower.net"
domainname. The relief Petronas
to
the
1 3 requested its complaintin the in rem actionis an orderdirectingGoDaddy.com transfer
in
t4
domainn€rme
Petronas.
"petronastower.net"
15
This Court hasnot yet had an opportunity rule on Petronas's
unopposed
motion
to
r6
relatingthe two actions. If the relatedcasemotionis granted,
however,
this Court canpromptly
1 7 consider motion,which Petronas
this
makesaspart of the in rem action. If the relatedcase
1 8 motionis denied, motionwill needto be re-filedfor consideration the Judgein the in rem
this
by
t 9 action.
20
B.
6'Petronastower.net"
Shouldbe Transferredto Petronas
trademarkandthe domain
Where,as in this case,a domainnameinfringesa registered
21
the
registrant
eithercannotbe located is not subject in personqmjurisdiction,
or
to
22
Anticyberpiracysectionof the LanhamAct authorizes Court to orderthe domainname
a
23
24
registrar transferthe domainnameto the trademark
to
owner. See15 U.S.C.$ 1125(d)(2XAXi)
25
26
27
DOMAIN NAME PURSUANTTO 15
28 NOTICEOF MOTION AND MOTION FORORDERTRANSFERzuNG
u.s.c. $ 1125(D)
AND FORENTRYOF ruDGMENT
PJH
Nos: 09-CV-5939 and10-CV00431
EMC
Case
APP160
Case4:10-cv-00431-PJH
DocumentT
Filed03/2 Page4 43
5110
of
I
and(ii).1 Because
thereis no dispute
that the requirements the Anticyberpiracy
of
sectionare
2 met in this case, Court is authorizedtoorderthe domainnameregistrarof
this
a
J
"petronastower.net"-Q6pnddy.com-totransfer
that domainnameto Petronas, ownerof
the
4
the "PETRONAS" mark.
5
6
1.
Infringesthe Trademark Rights of Petronas
"Petronastower.net"
Therecan be no disputethat the first requirement the transferof the
for
7
domainunderthe Anticyberpiracysectionof the LanhamAct-that the
"petronastower.net"
8
domainnameinfringesthe trademark
rights of Petronas-is met in this case. Specifically,
the
9
Anticyberpiracysectionappliesto any domainname"that violatesany right of the owner of a
l0
mark registered the Patentand TrademarkOffice, or protectedundersubsection [false
in
(a)
1 l designation originlor (c) ldilution]fof 15U.S.C.$ 1125]." 15U.S.C.$ 1125(d)(2XAXi).
of
l2
Here,the "petronastower.net"
domainnameviolatesthe rightsof Petronas
with respect
to
1 3 its federallyregistered
it
"PETRONAS"markbecause infringesthat mark under 15 U.S.C.$
t4
1114andcreates falsedesignation originunder15U.S.C.$ 1125(a).As an initial matter,
a
of
is
1 5 Petronas the owner of the duly registered
federaltrademarkfor the mark "PETRONAS." Ex.
r6
D at3:23-25and l0-1 1. In addition,the "petronastower.net"
domainnameinfringesthe
l 7 "PETRONAS"markunder15 U.S.C.$ 1114because domainnameis "a usein commerce"
the
l 8 of the "PETRONAS" markthat is "likely to cause
confusion"amongconsumers to whether
as
websiteusingthe "petronastower.net"
t 9 the pornographic
domainnameis associated
with
20 Petronas-which it is not. Au-Tomotive
Gold,Inc. v. Vollcswagen America,lnc.,457 F.3d
of
2I
(9th Cir. 2006). Moreover,the oopetronastower.net"
1062,1075-76
domainnameviolatesthe
22 rightsof Petronas
underl5 U.S.C.$ 1125(a) creating "falsedesignation origin" asto the
by
a
of
23 pornographic
websitefoundat the "petronastower.net"
domainnamebecause sitedid not
that
24
25
26
t For convenience,
a complete
copy of the Anticyberpiracy
section(15 U.S.C.$
ll25(d)(2)(A)) is attached Ex. C atL of 7.
as
27
28
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER TRANSFERRING DOMAIN NAME PI.]RSUANT TO 15
u.s.c. 1125(D)
$
ANDFOR
ENTRY ruDGMENT
OF
Case
Nos: 09-CV-5939
PJH and l0-CV00431EMC
APP161
-PJH DocumentTFiled03/2511
of
Case4:1
0-cv-00431
0 Page5 43
and, in fact, Petronas
1 "originate" with Petronas
stronglyobjectsto the site and its useof
(9thCir.
F.2d 1194,1201
2 "PETRONAS."New West
Corp.v. N.Y.M.Co.of California,595
a
J
of
1979)("Whetherwe call the violationinfringement,
unfair competition, falsedesignation
or
4
origin,the testis identical-is therea likelihoodof confusion?").
)
domain
for
Accordingly, the first requirement the transferof the "petronastower.net"
6
that
nameto Petronas
underthe Anticyberpiracysectionof the Lanhamis met because domain
7
nameinfringesthe trademarkrights of Petronas.
8
9
2.
Is
The Registrantof s6Petronastower.net"Unknown
for
to
underthe
The secondrequirement the transferof "petronastower.net" Petronas
1 0 Anticyberpiracysectionis met because
Petronas
could not locate-despite due diligence-the
ll
registrantof the domainnamenor could this Court obtain in personamjurisdictionover the
t 2 registrant. Where,ashere,the owner of a mark cannot"obtain in personamjurisdiction" or "was
l 3 not ableto frnd" the personwho registered infringing domainnamewith the "bad faith intent"
an
for
t 4 to profit from the useof the domainname,the secondrequirement the transferof the domain
1 5 underthe Anticyberpiracy
section met. See15 U.S.C.$ 1125(d)(2)(A)(ii).
is
t6
domainnamewas
Here,according GoDaddy'srecords, "petronastower.net"
to
the
London,
is
l 7 registered "Heiko Schonenekess"
by
whoseaddress "BPM 195226,372Old Street,
l 8 EclV 9AU, United Kingdom." Ex. A andE (detailingeffortsto contactregistrant).The internet
t 9 registrantalso providedan email address:
"ddjrivat@hotmaiLcom." Although Plaintiff
20 Petronas
tried repeatedly locateand contactthe registrant,including by FederalExpress,
to
2l
the
of
it
email,andtelephone, wasunableto do so. Id. Because registrant the
22 o'petronastower.net"
domaincould not be locatedor subjected in personamjurisdiction,the
to
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER TRANSFERRING DOMAIN NAME PURSUANT TO 15
u.s.c.$ l l2s(D)
ANDFOR
ENTRY ruDGMENT
OF
PJH and 10-CV00431
EMC
CaseNos: 09-CV-5939
APP162
Page6 43
Case4:1
0-cv-00431-PJH
DocumentT
Filed03/25/10
of
I
second
requirement the Anticyberpiracy
of
has
section beenmet with respect the
to
2
'opetronastower.net"
domain narrre.2
.|
C.
J
4
GoDaddyCertifiesThis Court's Authority to Transfer the
ttpetronastower.nettt
Domain Name
and,
GoDaddyis the registrarof the domainname"petronastower.net" as required the
by
5
Anitcyberpiracysection,hasprovidedcertificationthat this Court hasthe "control and authority"
6
7
to transfer "petronastower.net"
the
domainnameto Petronas.Specifically,15 U.S.C.$
II25(d)(2XDXD providesthat, uponthe filing of an Anticyberpiracyaction,"the domainname
8
registrar. . . shall expeditiously
depositwith the courtdocuments
the
sufficientto establish
9
court'scontroland authorityregarding disposition the registration useof the domain
the
and
of
10
nameto the court." GoDaddyprovidedthis informationto Petronas it is beingfiled along
and
11
with this motion. Ex. F. As a result,all of the requirements an orderdirectingGoDaddyto
for
t2
transferthe "petronastower.net"
domainnameto Petronas
underthe Anticyberpiracysection
13
t4
havebeenmet.
D.
Entry of Judgment
l5
In this action,Plaintiff Petronas
seeksan ordertransferringthe "petronastower.net"
r6
relief to
domainname. Upon the issuance suchan order,the Courtwill havegranted
of
complete
t7
Petronas entryofjudgment will be properunderFed.R. Civ. P. 54. Accordingly,Plaintiff
and
t 8 Petronas
requests
that in additionto an ordertransferringthe "petronastower.net"
domainname,
l 9 the Court alsoissuefinal judgmentin favor of Petronas.
20
IV.
2l
CONCLUSION
For the foregoingreasons,
Plaintiff Petronas
respectfully
requests orderdirecting
an
22 GoDaddy.com transferthe "petronastower.net"
to
domainnameto Petronas the entry of
and
23
2
..
Sectionll25(d)(2)(Axiix[Xbb) refersto
24 may direct" as a means locatinga registrant"publishingnoticeof the action.theasthe Court
of
in additionto providingnoticeat
mail andemail
addresses the registrant.This publication
of
requirement
doesnot applyto the present
case
25 because publicationrequirement irrelevantwherein personam
jurisdictioncannotbe
the
is
nameresistrant.
26 obtainedover the domain
27
DOMAIN NAME PURSUANTTO 15
28 NOTICEOF MOTION AND MOTION FORORDERTRANSFERzuNG
u .s .c .$ 1 1 2 5 (D )
AND FORENTRYOF ruDGMENT
Case
Nos: 09-CV-5939 andl0-CV00431
PJH
EMC
APP163
Case4:10-cv-00431-PJH
PageT
DocumentT
Filed03/25110
of43
I
judgmentin favor of Petronas. proposed
A
final judgmentarebeingfiled
orderandproposed
2
with this motion.
.,
J
Dated: March 25-2010
LAW OFFICESOF PERRYR. CLARK
4
5
By:
6
/s/ PerryR. Clark
PerryR. Clark
7
Attorney for Plaintiff
PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD
I
9
10
1l
t2
13
t4
15
t6
t7
l8
T9
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER TRANSFERRING DOMAIN NAME PURSUANT TO 15
u.s.c. r 12s(D)
$
AND FORENTRYOF ruDGMENT
EMC
Case
Nos: 09-CV-5939 and10-CV00431
PJH
APP164
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION
PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD
(PETRONAS),
Plaintiff,
CASE NO. 09-CV-5939PJH
vs.
GODADDY.COM, INC.,
Defendant.
_____________________________/
::: CONFIDENTIAL :::
30(b)(6) DEPOSITION OF JESSICA HANYEN
DATE:
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
TIME:
11:58 a.m.
LOCATION:
BALLARD SPAHR, LLP
1 East Washington Street, Suite 2300
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
REPORTED BY: JANICE HARRINGTON, RPR, CRR, CLR
AZ Certified Court Reporter No. 50844
Registered Professional Reporter
Certified Realtime Reporter
Certified LiveNote Reporter
MBreporting
111 Deerwood Road, Suite 200
San Ramon, California 94583
APP174
Page 2
1
::: APPEARANCES :::
2
3
4
5
6
FOR PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD (PETRONAS) PLAINTIFF:
Law Offices of Perry R. Clark
By: Perry R. Clark, Attorney At Law
825 San Antonio Road
Palo Alto, California 94303
(650) 248-5817
perry@perryclarklaw.com
7
8
9
10
11
FOR GODADDY.COM, INC., DEFENDANT:
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
By: David L. Lansky, Attorney At Law
650 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, California 94304-1050
(650) 320-4776
dlansky@wsgr.com:
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
APP175
Page 3
1
::: INDEX OF EXAMINATIONS :::
2
EXAMINATION BY:
PAGE
3
MR. CLARK
5
4
5
6
7
::: INDEX OF REQUESTS :::
8
PAGE
LINE
REQUEST
9
10
None
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
APP176
Page 17
1
Q.
Okay.
And the section of that says,
2
"Determine if the website is hosted at one of the Go
3
Daddy group's companies by checking the IP address."
4
Do you see that?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q.
How would someone at Go Daddy applying
7
this policy determine if a website is hosted at one
8
of the Go Daddy group companies?
9
A.
We would basically do what's called a
10
Whois look up.
11
the registrant information like a standard one.
12
one is specific for hosting.
13
company that the domain name or the website is hosted
14
with.
15
And it is not one that's specific to
This
That would tell us what
If it was showing that it was hosted with
16
a Go Daddy IP address once we did that look-up, we
17
would then check our tools to see if we can identify
18
the account which would tell us with 100% certainty
19
that it is hosted with our company.
20
Q.
Okay.
And then on Section 1.1.1 which is
21
not hosted, send "Not hosted template to the
22
complainant."
Do you see that?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
If Go Daddy applying this policy
25
determines that the website is not hosted at Go
APP177
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?