Petroliam Nasional Berhad v. GoDaddy.com, Inc.
Filing
140
Declaration of Joseph G. Fiorino in Support of 112 Go Daddy's Motion for Summary Judgment filed by GoDaddy.com, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6)(Slafsky, John) (Filed on 11/23/2011) Modified on 11/28/2011 (vlk, COURT STAFF).
EXHIBIT 3
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
OAKLAND DIVISION
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD
(PETRONAS),
Plaintiff,
vs.
CASE NO. 09-CV-5939 PJH
GODADDY.COM, INC.,
Defendant.
/
11
12
13
14
CONFIDENTIAL PURSUANT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER
15
DEPOSITION OF KEVIN FITZSIMMONS
16
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
17
Pages 1 - 82
18
19
20
Reported by:
Shelley M. Sailor, CSR #10254
21
22
23
24
25
1
1
2
3
Q.
I'm going to stop you again.
Can you
explain to me what URL forwarding is?
A.
URL forwarding in this case is forwarding a
4
domain name to another domain name.
5
were to type in, as an example, shoretel.eu, we
6
could redirect that to shoretel.com.
7
8
9
Q.
So if somebody
Why would you want to redirect it from one
domain name to another?
A.
There may be a number of reasons you would
10
want to redirect a domain name from one to another.
11
But oftentimes your content is actually hosted on
12
Shoretel.com, and you just want users to go to that
13
particular -- be directed to that particular site
14
even though they typed in another domain that maybe
15
perhaps is, you know, a Europe-based domain.
16
Q.
Is there -- you mentioned shoretel.eu as an
17
example of a domain name subject to this URL
18
forwarding service.
19
that your company has that is subject to URL
20
forwarding?
21
A.
Are there other domain names
That was an example.
I do believe we do do
22
forwarding on that .eu to a specific URL on our .com
23
website, but I can't tell you off the top of my head
24
exactly what forwarding we currently have in place.
25
We do have forwarding for a number of our
14
1
education department.
2
their operating systems and administering their
3
operating systems.
4
5
Q.
And they offer classes in
Have you ever taken any legal studies
classes?
6
A.
I have not.
7
Q.
Have you ever done any work for ICANN?
8
A.
I have not.
9
Q.
Have you ever attended an ICANN meeting?
10
A.
I have not.
11
Q.
Are you a member of any ICANN constituency
12
or group?
13
A.
No, I am not.
14
Q.
Have you ever done any work for a domain
15
name registrar?
16
A.
No.
17
Q.
Have you ever done any work for a domain
18
name registry?
19
A.
No.
20
Q.
Have you ever done any work in any
21
connection with trademark law?
22
A.
No.
23
Q.
Do you have any prior experience with
24
25
cybersquatting?
A.
I have knowledge of cybersquatting.
I
29
1
don't have any direct experience with it.
2
Q.
How do you have knowledge of it?
3
A.
In the field that I'm in, I'm aware of what
4
5
6
7
cybersquatting is.
Q.
What is your understanding of what
cybersquatting is?
A.
My understanding of cybersquatting is
8
somebody registering a domain name that is
9
trademarked by another entity, and that's it.
10
11
Q.
Have you ever published any articles
concerning DNS?
12
A.
I have not.
13
Q.
Have you ever published any articles
14
concerning registration or maintenance of DNS?
15
A.
No.
16
Q.
Have you ever published any articles
17
concerning URL forwarding?
18
A.
No.
19
Q.
Have you ever published any articles
20
concerning routing?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
Have you ever published any articles
23
concerning trademark law?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Have you ever published any articles
30
1
concerning cybersquatting?
2
A.
No.
3
Q.
Have you ever conducted any research
4
projects concerning domain name registration?
5
A.
No.
6
Q.
Have you ever conducted any research
7
projects concerning URL forwarding?
8
A.
No.
9
Q.
Have you ever conducted any research
10
projects concerning trademark law?
11
A.
No.
12
Q.
Have you ever conducted any research
13
projects concerning cybersquatting?
14
A.
No.
15
Q.
Have you ever given any public
16
presentations concerning the DNS?
17
A.
No.
18
Q.
Have you ever given any public
19
presentations concerning registration or maintenance
20
of DNS?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
Have you ever given any public
23
presentations concerning URL or domain name
24
forwarding?
25
A.
No.
31
1
2
Q.
Have you ever given any public
presentations concerning trademark law?
3
A.
No.
4
Q.
Have you ever given any public
5
presentations concerning cybersquatting?
6
A.
No.
7
Q.
You answered some questions earlier about
8
your prior experience or lack thereof with respect
9
to court litigation.
When I refer to testimony
10
here, I'm going to use it in a broad sense, which
11
might encompass testimony before a legislative body
12
or an agency.
13
Have you ever testified concerning the DNS?
14
A.
No.
15
Q.
Have you ever testified concerning the
16
registration or maintenance of domain names?
17
A.
No.
18
Q.
Have you ever testified concerning URL
19
forwarding?
20
A.
No.
21
Q.
Have you ever testified concerning
22
trademark law?
23
A.
No.
24
Q.
Have you ever testified concerning
25
cybersquatting?
32
1
really doesn't have a role in this particular
2
depiction.
3
Q.
Let's move to page 2 of your report.
4
A.
Okay.
5
Q.
Can you walk me through the graphic that's
6
7
on page 2?
A.
Sure.
So in this case you've got an end
8
user that wants to register a new, a domain, and
9
they can go to any number of registrars which are
10
represented at the bottom of the diagram.
11
registrars:
12
Register.com.
13
Three
GoDaddy, Network Solution,
And in this case the user enters their
14
information into the registrar.
So their contact
15
information, their credit card.
And then that
16
information is then propagated out to the registry,
17
which is VeriSign in this case.
18
Q.
At the top of the page you say:
"By
19
registering a domain name, a person (called the
20
registrant) is able to designate the Authoritative
21
Name Server [sic] that is associated with that
22
domain name."
23
A.
24
25
Is that correct?
That's correct.
MR. CLARK:
Actually it says "Domain Name
Server."
47
1
2
3
4
5
BY MR. SLAFSKY:
Q.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Is there one authoritative
domain name server or two or three?
A.
Does it matter?
There needs to be two, two authoritative
domain name servers that the end user can specify.
6
Q.
Why do there need to be two?
7
A.
Redundancy is one reason.
8
Q.
Why is redundancy important?
9
A.
Because if the primary authoritative domain
10
name server cannot be reached, then your domain
11
can't be resolved.
12
Q.
13
server?
14
A.
What is an authoritative domain name
It's a domain name server that contains the
15
authoritative records for a domain, so the actual
16
record that is authoritative for that domain.
17
18
Q.
How does one designate an authoritative
domain name server?
19
A.
It's done through a registrar.
20
Q.
Is there any other way of doing it?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
What would happen if there was no
23
24
25
authoritative domain name server in the process?
A.
If there is no authoritative domain name
server, you wouldn't be able to resolve.
48
1
Q.
Okay.
Do you have any understanding of the
2
services that GoDaddy in particular rendered in
3
connection with the two domain names that you cite
4
here in this lawsuit following the initial
5
registration?
6
A.
Yes.
I understand they provided
7
registration services, URL forwarding services, DNS
8
services for these two domain names.
9
10
11
Q.
Do you consider those services to be
unusual in any way?
A.
I think they are part of their normal
12
service offerings that you would find for a
13
provider.
14
Q.
A provider being a registrar?
15
A.
Or a hosting provider.
16
Q.
You testified earlier about the
17
identification of the authoritative domain name
18
server.
19
A.
Right.
20
Q.
Where does that fit into this process here?
21
A.
So that occurs with the registrar.
There's
22
an identification of where the authoritative DNS
23
records are being held.
24
Q.
That's an identification by whom?
25
A.
By the customer.
The customer's saying I
54
1
want my authoritative DNS records at this DNS server
2
or -- it could be any DNS server that they choose.
3
Q.
And over the course of the domain name
4
registration, if a customer wants to change that
5
information, is he or she able to do that?
6
A.
Yes, they are, through the registrar.
7
Q.
Is there any other way to update that
8
information?
9
A.
Not that I'm aware of, no.
10
Q.
Can we turn to page 4 of your report.
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
If I'm not mistaken, the statements on this
13
page in particular, the bullet points are based on
14
your review of particular GoDaddy documents; is that
15
correct?
16
A.
Correct.
17
Q.
So I believe it's the fourth bullet point
18
down, it refers to April 26, 2008 and May 3rd, 2008.
19
It says:
20
'petronastower.net' and 'petronastowers.net' to
21
'auto renew'."
22
23
"GoDaddy set the domain names
What does "auto renew" mean?
A.
Auto renew as it pertains to this comment
24
here is a function where the domain would renew
25
itself upon expiration automatically and charge the
55
1
of domain name resolution."
2
3
Is that an accurate statement of your
opinion?
4
A.
Correct.
Yes.
5
Q.
Can you explain to me why you believe that
6
domain name registrars do not play a direct or
7
active role in the process of domain name
8
resolution?
9
A.
In my opinion, the domain name resolution
10
process is a separate function from registration in
11
that the DNS servers themselves are not part of
12
registration.
13
any entity.
14
Q.
So those DNS servers can be run by
Okay.
But the identification of those
15
domain name servers is done by the registrar; is
16
that correct?
17
A.
Correct.
18
Q.
If the domain name registrars do not
19
identify those domain name servers, can there be
20
resolution?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
And because that's only a one-time process,
But that's a one-time process.
23
in your opinion you do not believe that is a direct
24
or active role.
25
A.
Is that accurate?
Correct.
57
1
2
BY MR. SLAFSKY:
Q.
I can read the whole sentence, but that's
3
correct, the last clause of the first sentence.
4
"GoDaddy caused to be programmed to link those
5
domain names to the IP address of another server
6
controlled and operated by GoDaddy."
7
A.
Correct.
8
Q.
So what do you mean by "GoDaddy caused to
9
10
11
12
13
14
be programmed" in this context?
A.
So the customer initiates the request, and
GoDaddy actually programmatically does the change.
Q.
Programmatically, you mean through
technological means?
A.
15
Right.
MR. SLAFSKY:
I think we are about to run
16
out of videotape, so I am just going to take a quick
17
break here so the videographer can do his magic.
18
THE VIDEOGRAPHER:
We are going off the
19
record.
The time is 11:21 a.m.
20
of videotape number one in the deposition of Kevin
21
Fitzsimmons.
22
(A recess was taken.)
23
THE VIDEOGRAPHER:
Here marks the end
We are back on the
24
record.
The time is 11:29 a.m.
Here marks the
25
beginning of videotape number two in the deposition
65
1
Q.
Professional.
2
A.
Professional?
I think the references made
3
in the report include references to RFCs, as I
4
mentioned earlier.
5
believe those support my opinions.
6
7
MR. SLAFSKY:
10
11
I
I'm going to mark as Exhibit
No. 6 the First Amended Complaint in this matter.
8
9
And to the ICANN agreements.
(Exhibit No. 6 was marked for
identification.)
BY MR. SLAFSKY:
Q.
Mr. Fitzsimmons, I just ask you to take a
12
moment to look at this document.
13
you to read all of it.
14
I am not expecting
Is this document familiar to you?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Have you reviewed the document?
17
A.
Yes.
18
I believe I have seen this document.
I believe I have reviewed this
document.
19
MR. SLAFSKY:
I am going to mark as
20
Exhibit 7 a copy of the amended answer and
21
counterclaim in this matter.
22
(Exhibit No. 7 was marked for
23
identification.)
24
BY MR. SLAFSKY:
25
Q.
I'm going to ask you again,
67
1
Mr. Fitzsimmons, to take a quick look at this
2
document as well.
3
Once again, I'm not asking you to review
4
everything, but I am going to ask you if you are at
5
all familiar with this document.
6
A.
Yeah, I don't believe I have seen this
7
document before.
8
have seen this document previously.
9
Q.
I am not sure whether or not I
And other than Exhibit 6, which is the
10
First Amended Complaint, have you reviewed any court
11
filings or pleadings in connection with this
12
lawsuit?
13
A.
There may have been others.
I didn't spend
14
a lot of time looking at the pleadings.
15
looking more so at the amendments in my report here.
16
Q.
I was
And to the extent you did review other
17
court filings or pleadings in this matter, would it
18
have been in the context of your discussions with
19
Mr. Clark?
20
A.
Correct.
21
Q.
You didn't independently do any review or
22
analysis of court documents that may be publicly
23
available?
24
25
A.
No.
MR. SLAFSKY:
I am going to mark as Exhibit
68
1
R E P O R T E R ' S
2
C E R T I F I C A T E
I, SHELLEY M. SAILOR, duly authorized to
3
administer oaths pursuant to Section 2093(b) of the
4
California Code of Civil Procedure, do hereby
5
certify that the witness in the foregoing deposition
6
was by me duly sworn to testify the truth in the
7
within-entitled cause; that said deposition was
8
taken at the time and place therein cited; that
9
testimony of said witness was reported by me and
10
thereafter transcribed under my direction into
11
typewriting; that the foregoing is a complete and
12
accurate record of said testimony; and that the
13
witness was given an opportunity to read and correct
14
said deposition and to subscribe the same.
15
the signature of the witness not be affixed to the
16
deposition, the witness shall not have availed
17
himself of the opportunity to sign or the signature
18
has been waived.
19
counsel nor attorney for any of the parties in the
20
foregoing deposition and caption named nor in any
21
way interested in the outcome of the cause named in
22
said caption.
23
DATED:
Should
I further certify that I am not of
November 10, 2011
24
25
SHELLEY M. SAILOR, CSR NO. 10254
82
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?