Petroliam Nasional Berhad v. GoDaddy.com, Inc.

Filing 143

Declaration of Perry Clark in Support of 134 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment re Liability for Contributory Cybersquatting as to PETRONASTOWERS.NET filed byPetroliam Nasional Berhad. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit 11, # 13 Exhibit 12, # 14 Exhibit 13, # 15 Exhibit 14, # 16 Exhibit 15, # 17 Exhibit 16, # 18 Exhibit 17, # 19 Exhibit 18, # 20 Exhibit 19, # 21 Exhibit 20, # 22 Exhibit 21, # 23 Exhibit 22, # 24 Exhibit 23, # 25 Exhibit 24, # 26 Exhibit 25, *** # 27 Exhibit 26 FILED IN ERROR. DOCUMENT LOCKED. DOCUMENT TO BE REFILED LATER. *** , # 28 Exhibit 27, # 29 Exhibit 28)(Related document(s) 134 ) (Clark, Perry) (Filed on 11/25/2011) Modified on 11/28/2011 (ewn, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Ex. 2

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CLARK DECL. ISO REPLY ISO MTN. PART. SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case No: 09-CV-5939 PJH

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

JOHN L. SLAFSKY, State Bar No. 195513
DAVID L. LANSKY, State Bar No. 199952
HOLLIS BETH HIRE, State Bar No. 203651
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
Professional Corporation
650 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1050
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant / Counterclaimant
GODADDY.COM, INC.

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD,

13

Plaintiff,

14

vs.

15

GODADDY.COM, INC.,

16

Defendant.

17
18

GODADDY.COM, INC.,

19
20
21
22

Counterclaimant,
vs.
PETROLIAM NASIONAL BERHAD,
Counterclaim Defendant.

23

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO.: 09-CV-5939 PJH

GO DADDY’S RESPONSE TO
PLAINTIFF’S THIRD SET OF
INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 21-25)

24
25
26
27
28
GO DADDY’S RESPONSE TO THIRD
SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 21-25)
Case No: 09-CV-5939 PJH

4534112_2.DOCX

APP010

1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33, Defendant / Counterclaimant

2

GoDaddy.com, Inc. (“Go Daddy”), by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby responds to

3

the Third Set of Interrogatories (“Requests”) by Plaintiff / Counterclaim Defendant Petroliam

4

Nasional Berhad (“Plaintiff” or “Petronas”).

5

No admissions of any nature whatsoever are implied by, or should be inferred from, these

6

Responses. Each of these Responses is based on Go Daddy’s understanding of each individual

7

interrogatory and, to the extent that Plaintiff asserts an interpretation of any interrogatory that is

8

inconsistent with that understanding, Go Daddy reserves the right to supplement these

9

Responses.

10
11

GENERAL OBJECTIONS
Go Daddy makes the following general objections, whether or not separately set forth in

12

response to each interrogatory. Although Go Daddy may repeat some of these general objections

13

in a specific response because they are particularly applicable, such specific citations are not to

14

be construed as a waiver of any other general objections applicable to the interrogatory. These

15

general objections are incorporated in each response to each interrogatory as if fully set forth in

16

each of the individual responses below.

17

GENERAL OBJECTION NO. 1:

18

Go Daddy objects to the Requests, and to each and every individual interrogatory, to the

19

extent they seek information protected by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine,

20

and/or any other applicable privilege or protection. Without prejudice to this objection, Go Daddy

21

will provide responses to the Requests to the extent that such responses do not waive such

22

privileges or protections.

23

GENERAL OBJECTION NO. 2:

24

All responses to the Requests are based upon the information presently known to Go

25

Daddy and are given without prejudice to Go Daddy’s right to adduce evidence discovered or

26

analyzed subsequent to the date of these responses. Go Daddy expressly reserves the right to

27

revise and supplement its responses to the Requests.

28
GO DADDY’S RESPONSE TO THIRD
SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 21-25)
Case No: 09-CV-5939 PJH

~2~
APP011

4534112_2.DOCX

1
2

GENERAL OBJECTION NO. 3:
Go Daddy objects to the Requests, and to each and every individual interrogatory, to the

3

extent they seek information outside of Go Daddy’s possession, custody, or control, on the

4

grounds that any such request is overbroad and unduly burdensome, seeks to impose discovery

5

obligations in excess of those imposed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and would subject

6

Go Daddy to unreasonable annoyance, burden, and expense.

7

GENERAL OBJECTION NO. 4:

8
9

Go Daddy objects to the Requests, and to each and every individual interrogatory, as
unduly burdensome, oppressive and in violation of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to the

10

extent they purport to require Go Daddy to respond on behalf of, or conduct any inquiry or

11

investigation with respect to, any party other than Go Daddy. Go Daddy will only answer the

12

request on its own behalf.

13

GENERAL OBJECTION NO. 5:

14

Go Daddy objects to the Requests to the extent that they seek information that is neither

15

relevant, admissible, nor reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence,

16

and to the extent that they require Go Daddy to make legal conclusions.

17

GENERAL OBJECTION NO. 6:

18

Go Daddy objects to the Requests, and to each and every individual interrogatory, as

19

overbroad and unduly burdensome to the extent they do not include a limitation or proposed

20

definition of a relevant time period.

21

GENERAL OBJECTION NO. 7:

22

Go Daddy objects to the Requests, and to each and every individual interrogatory, to the

23

extent they are not consistent with or do not meet the requirements of Federal Rules of Civil

24

Procedure. Go Daddy’s agreement to endeavor to answer the Requests, and each and every

25

individual interrogatory, is not, and should not be construed as, Go Daddy’s waiver of its right to

26

object to these or any other requests as violative of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

27

GENERAL OBJECTION NO. 8:

28

Go Daddy objects to the Requests, and to each and every individual interrogatory
GO DADDY’S RESPONSE TO THIRD
SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 21-25)
Case No: 09-CV-5939 PJH

~3~
APP012

4534112_2.DOCX

1

contained therein, to the extent they seek information related to experts. Go Daddy will provide

2

information related to experts consistent with the Court’s schedule for expert discovery.

3

GENERAL OBJECTION NO. 9:

4

Go Daddy specifically reserves all objections as to the competence, relevancy, materiality,

5

and admissibility of its documents and interrogatory responses or the subject matter thereof, and

6

all rights to object on any ground to the use of any document or interrogatory response, or the

7

subject matter thereof, in any subsequent proceeding, including without limitation the trial of this

8

or any action. Go Daddy’s Responses are made expressly subject to, and without in any manner

9

waiving, any and all objections to the competency, relevance, materiality and/or admissibility of

10

any of the matters encompassed in the following Responses.

11

SPECIFIC RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS

12

Go Daddy expressly incorporates the above General Objections as though set forth fully in

13

response to each of the following individual interrogatories and, to the extent they are not raised in

14

any particular response, Go Daddy does not waive those objections. An answer to an

15

interrogatory shall not be deemed a waiver of any applicable specific or general objection.

16

Likewise, an answer to an interrogatory shall not be deemed an admission of any assertions

17

contained in that interrogatory.

18

INTERROGATORY NO. 21:

19

Please describe in detail the services provided by GoDaddy related to the disputed

20

domain names, including technical aspects of routing/forwarding the disputed domain names.

21

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 21:

22

In addition to the General Objections, Go Daddy objects to this interrogatory on the

23

grounds that it is cumulative, overbroad and harassing, vague, ambiguous and unintelligible,

24

particularly with respect to the phrase “services provided by GoDaddy related to the disputed

25

domain names...”.

26

Subject to and without waving the foregoing objections, Go Daddy responds as follows:

27

Since April 1, 2007, Go Daddy has served as the registrar for the domain names

28

“petronastower.net” and “petronastowers.net.” As part of its registrar services, Go Daddy
GO DADDY’S RESPONSE TO THIRD
SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 21-25)
Case No: 09-CV-5939 PJH

~4~
APP013

4534112_2.DOCX

1

provided routing services, pointing the domain names to the name servers or websites of the

2

registrant’s choosing. At times, Go Daddy routed or “forwarded” the domain names to a pre-

3

existing website, automatically at the request of the domain name registrant. Further information

4

concerning the services provided by Go Daddy to the domain names can be found at GD-

5

000293; GD-000298; GD-000361—GD-000362; GD-000366; GD-000384—GD-000392; GD-

6

000560—GD-000563 of Go Daddy’s production. Go Daddy transferred the petronastower.net

7

domain name to counsel for Petronas, Perry Clark, on May 18, 2010. Go Daddy transferred the

8

petronastowers.net domain name to Clark on August 30, 2010. For additional details regarding

9

the technical aspects of the services provided, see the Expert Report of Michael Palage, served

10

on Petronas on October 3, 2011.

11

INTERROGATORY NO. 22:

12

Please describe in detail the information GoDaddy has in its possession regarding David

13

Daash and the “registration and use of the disputed domain names; hosting of destination

14

website; destination website content,” to which GoDaddy refers in its supplemental initial

15

disclosures dated June 29, 2011, including when GoDaddy became aware that David Daash was

16

the registrant of one or both of the disputed domain names and any changes to the Whois record

17

related thereto.

18

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 22:

19

Subject to and without waving the foregoing objections, Go Daddy responds as follows:

20

The contact audit history possessed by Go Daddy for domain name “petronastower.net”

21

indicates that at the time petronastower.net was transferred to Go Daddy on April 1, 2007, Heiko

22

Schoenekess was the registrant. The registrant of petronastower.net was changed by the account

23

holder to David Daash on April 1, 2007. On July 2, 2009 the registrant was changed by the

24

account holder back to Heiko Schoenekess. On December 12, 2009, the registrant of

25

“petronastower.net” was changed by the account holder to David Daash, and again back to Heiko

26

Schoenekess on the very same date. The contact audit history relating to David Daash and

27

petronastower.net, including Daash’s listed registrant contact information, can be found at GD-

28

000151—GD-000152 of Go Daddy’s production. A copy of the results of a Whois search for
GO DADDY’S RESPONSE TO THIRD
SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 21-25)
Case No: 09-CV-5939 PJH

~5~
APP014

4534112_2.DOCX

1

petronastower.net from December 21, 2009—listing David Daash as the registrant—can also be

2

found at GD-000618—GD-000619 of Go Daddy’s production.

3

The contact audit history possessed by Go Daddy for domain name “petronastowers.net”

4

indicates that at the time petronastowers.net was transferred to Go Daddy on April 1, 2007,

5

Heiko Schoenekess was the registrant. The registrant of petronastowers.net was changed by the

6

account holder to David Daash on April 1, 2007. On July 2, 2009 the registrant was changed by

7

the account holder back to Heiko Schoenekess. The contact audit history relating to David

8

Daash and petronastowers.net, including Daash’s listed registrant contact information, can be

9

found at GD-000109—GD-000110 of Go Daddy’s production.

10
11

INTERROGATORY NO. 23:
Please describe in detail the information GoDaddy has in its possession regarding Bruno

12

Zehnder and the “hosting of destination website and destination website content” to which

13

GoDaddy refers in its supplemental initial disclosures dated June 29, 2011.

14

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 23:

15

Subject to and without waving the foregoing objections, Go Daddy responds as follows:

16

On December 21, 2009, a search was performed in the Whois database to determine the

17

domain name and contact information for the registrant of the domain name “visit-x.net”—the

18

“destination website” to which “petronastower.net” had been directed as of December 21, 2009.

19

The Whois search results indicate Bruno Zehnder to be the registrant of “visit-x.net.” Further

20

information concerning this search, as well as a copy of the search results, can be found at GD-

21

001593—GD-001603 of Go Daddy’s production.

22

INTERROGATORY NO. 24:

23

Please describe in detail GoDaddy’s services for “External Domains” to which GoDaddy

24

refers in the document produced with production PET GD 2469 (attached hereto as Exhibit A),

25

including the technical aspects of such services and the differences, if any, between those

26

services and the “routing/forwarding the disputed domain names” to which GoDaddy refers in its

27

supplemental initial disclosures dated June 29, 2011 and by identifying all persons with

28

knowledge of the foregoing and by describing all documents related to the foregoing.
GO DADDY’S RESPONSE TO THIRD
SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 21-25)
Case No: 09-CV-5939 PJH

~6~
APP015

4534112_2.DOCX

1
2

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 24:
In addition to the General Objections, Go Daddy objects to this interrogatory on the

3

grounds that it is cumulative, overbroad and harassing, vague, ambiguous and unintelligible,

4

particularly with respect to the phrase “services provided by GoDaddy related to the disputed

5

domain names...”.

6

Subject to and without waving the foregoing objections, Go Daddy responds as follows:

7

The reference to “External Domains” in the document Bates-numbered PET GD 2469

8

indicates that Go Daddy hosting customers can have traffic routed to Go Daddy-hosted websites

9

from domains registered elsewhere (not with Go Daddy) (“external domains”). Such routing is

10

the same as “routing/forwarding” as referenced in Go Daddy’s supplemental initial disclosures.

11

Go Daddy does not provide any services for the external domains themselves.

12
13
14

Persons with relevant knowledge include Jeff Munson and John Roling.
INTERROGATORY NO. 25:
Please state when GoDaddy first began providing the domain name forwarding service to

15

which it refers in Paragraph 29 of its Amended Answer June 20, 2011 to any customer and

16

identify all persons with knowledge of the foregoing and describe all documents related to the

17

foregoing.

18

RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 25:

19
20

In addition to the General Objections, Go Daddy objects to this interrogatory on the
grounds that it is overbroad and harassing.

21

Subject to and without waving the foregoing objections, Go Daddy responds as follows:

22

Go Daddy first began providing domain name forwarding services on April 3, 2001.

23

Persons with relevant knowledge include George Kearns

24
25

Dated: October 19, 2011

WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH & ROSATI
Professional Corporation

26
By:

27

.
John L. Slafsky
David L. Lansky
Hollis Beth Hire

28
GO DADDY’S RESPONSE TO THIRD
SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 21-25)
Case No: 09-CV-5939 PJH

~7~
APP016

4534112_2.DOCX

APP017

APP017.1

APP017.2

APP017.3