Facebook, Inc. v. Various, Inc. et al

Filing 17

Declaration of Jeffrey T. Norberg in Support of 16 Motion to Expedite Discovery and Entry of Proposed Protective Order filed by Facebook, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L)(Related document(s) 16 ) (Norberg, Jeffrey) (Filed on 5/12/2011) Modified on 5/13/2011 (jlm, COURT STAFF).

EXHIBIT L

Norberg, Jeffrey
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:

Mandell, Floyd A. [[e-mail]]
Thursday, May 12, 2011 3:21 PM
Norberg, Jeffrey
[e-mail]; Dorsey, William J.; Holland, Kristin L.; Rhodes, Michael
RE: Facebook v FriendFinder

Jeff:
We took all measures in our control to address your claims with the understanding that the parties would meet for a global
settlement or mediation session. This included stopping all new traffic to the site and informing all participants in our
client's program that they would not be compensated for any traffic they attempt to send.
Your strained attempt to claim that unreasonable demands made in your cease and desist letter constitute a start of the
meet and confer process is disingenuous and not in accordance with the local rules requiring a good faith meet and
confer. You provided us with no opportunity to review your proposed discovery in advance of the call today (unless 12
minutes to review only some of the materials is considered reasonable), refused any compromise whatsoever, and
refused to give us an opportunity to talk with our clients, knowing that I am traveling for INTA tomorrow. You have refused
to delay your client's motion to allow us to review or consider it, discuss it with our client, or meet with us further.
The activity originally complained about has been ongoing since 2009, and your client knew about it. That conduct has
ceased. You have not articulated what emergency exists that necessitates the extraordinary relief of either expedited
discovery or a preliminary injunction. For these reasons, we urge you to reconsider filing a motion until we have had an
opportunity to review it, discuss it with our client, and continue and conclude the meet and confer process. As we
mentioned, failing that, we will pursue all available remedies under Rule 37.
Floyd
FLOYD A. MANDELL, P.C.
National Co-Chairman
Intellectual Property Department
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
525 W. Monroe Street
Chicago, IL 60661-3693
p / 312.902.5235
f / 312.577.8982
Bio | VCard | Email | www.kattenlaw.com

From: Norberg, Jeffrey [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 5:06 PM
To: Mandell, Floyd A.
Cc: [e-mail]; Dorsey, William J.
Subject: RE: Facebook v FriendFinder

Floyd, 

As I said during our call today, Facebook has been requesting since the outset of the case (1) the identities of the 
participants in your clients’ affiliate network; and (2) documents sufficient for us to determine the revenue your client 
has earned that is attributable to the use of the FACE BOOK OF SEX mark.  We have also repeatedly explained that we 
cannot have any meaningful mediation unless your client provides this information in advance.  We also need this 
information to quickly identify and take action against the numerous FACE BOOK OF SEX related infringers that are 
directly attributable to your client’s affiliate program, and so we can ensure that our anticipated preliminary injunction 
covers all of the third‐party infringers. 
1

If your client is willing to stipulate, by the end of my day today, that it will provide us this information, we are willing to 
sit down and mediate the dispute.  Short of that, we will be filing our motion for expedited discovery tonight. 

Sincerely, 

Jeff 

From: Dorsey, William J. [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 12:51 PM
To: Norberg, Jeffrey
Cc: Mandell, Floyd A.
Subject: RE: Facebook v FriendFinder

Jeff, per my voicemail, we're running about 20 minutes behind schedule. In the meantime, we would appreciate it if you
would send over the actual proposed discovery requests to discuss on the call.

WILLIAM J. DORSEY
Partner
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
525 W. Monroe Street / Chicago, IL 60661-3693
p / [phone] f / [phone]
[e-mail] / www.kattenlaw.com

From: Norberg, Jeffrey [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 12:28 PM
To: Mandell, Floyd A.
Cc: Dorsey, William J.; Holland, Kristin L.
Subject: RE: Facebook v FriendFinder

Floyd, 
As I said during our call this morning and as Mike has repeatedly said in his correspondence, Various’ actions to date 
have been insufficient to end the infringing activity by both the Named Defendants and the third‐party affiliates, or to 
facilitate any meaningful mediation of this dispute.  Various continues to use the FACEBOOK mark and other infringing 
marks in its domains, and there are still an unknown number of third‐parties who are actively infringing the FACEBOOK 
mark as a direct result of Various’ affiliate program.  We have repeatedly asked you to provide details of the affiliate 
program that would allow us to work to end the ongoing infringing uses, but your client has refused.  Your client has also 
refused our repeated requests for information regarding revenues attributable to use of the FACE BOOK OF SEX mark.  
As we told you, we need this information before we can hold any meaningful mediation, but your client has still refused. 
 Accordingly, we intend to move for expedited discovery in advance of a motion for preliminary injunction to put an 
immediate end your clients’ and the affiliates’ ongoing infringement.   
More specifically, Facebook intends to seek discovery on the following general categories: 
‐ Details regarding the affiliate program, including the identities of all affiliates or other entities who have ever directed 
traffic to the Named Defendants’ sites, and the establishment, scope and functionality of the program;  
‐ The Named Defendants’ selection, clearance, adoption, use, promotion and licensing of the FACE BOOK OF SEX mark; 
2

‐ Instances of actual confusion between the parties’ marks; and 
‐ Revenue attributable to Named Defendants’ infringement, including without limitation the affiliate program and the 
use of the FACE BOOK OF SEX mark. 
Facebook intends to seek this discovery via interrogatories and document requests to be answered within 15 days, and 
via depositions to occur shortly after Various’ responses to this discovery.  Facebook also intends to seek leave of Court 
to serve subpoenas on third‐parties with relevant information regarding the affiliate program, such as Domains By 
Proxy.   
I look forward to speaking with you at 1:00 California time today. 
Sincerely, 
Jeff 

From: Mandell, Floyd A. [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2011 9:18 AM
To: Norberg, Jeffrey
Cc: Dorsey, William J.; Holland, Kristin L.
Subject: Facebook v FriendFinder

Dear Jeff:

Please send me what discovery you seek on an expedited basis immediately, so that we can have a meaningful
conversation about it, and I can better understand what you seek, and the urgency before our scheduled call at 1:00 p.m.
Pacific time today.
As of the sending of this email, we have had no substantive discussion about expedited discovery, and I do not know what
you seek. I do know that we have taken extraordinary measures to stop all of the complained of conduct, and that the
conduct Facebook objects to had been ongoing for the last couple of years.
I understand that you want to file a motion late this afternoon, so I do not understand why you did not bother to call me
until late this morning. As you probably know, I will be out of town starting tomorrow and leaving for the INTA meeting,
and I expect that one of my partners, Will Dorsey or Kristin Holland will be handling this.
Given that our client voluntarily ceased the complained of activity, I am also going to be interested
in understanding your grounds for claiming that you will need a preliminary injunction.
Again, please send me the list of items you wish us to voluntarily agree to produced by way of discovery on an expedited
basis, so I have time to review it with our client.
If you have a proposed protective order, please send that along too. I assume you will be seeking information that is
confidential, as will we in this case.  

FLOYD A. MANDELL, P.C.
National Co-Chairman
Intellectual Property Department
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
525 W. Monroe Street
Chicago, IL 60661-3693
p / 312.902.5235
f / 312.577.8982
3

Bio | VCard | Email | www.kattenlaw.com

===========================================================
CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal
Revenue
Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to be used and cannot
be used
by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on the
taxpayer.
===========================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the
exclusive
use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that
is
proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable
law. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying,
disclosure or
distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please
notify
the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the
original
message without making any copies.
===========================================================
NOTIFICATION: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership
that has
elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997).
===========================================================

This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
If you are the intended recipient, please be advised that the content of this message is subject to access, review and disclosure by the sender's Email System
Administrator.
IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this
communication (including any attachment) is not intended or written by us to be used, and cannot be used, (i) by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax
penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) for promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

===========================================================
CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal
Revenue
Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to be used and cannot
be used
by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on the
taxpayer.
===========================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the
exclusive
use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that
is
proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable
law. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying,
disclosure or
distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please
notify
the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the
original
4

message without making any copies.
===========================================================
NOTIFICATION: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership
that has
elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997).
===========================================================

This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use,
disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.
If you are the intended recipient, please be advised that the content of this message is subject to access, review and disclosure by the sender's Email System
Administrator.
IRS Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this
communication (including any attachment) is not intended or written by us to be used, and cannot be used, (i) by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax
penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) for promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

===========================================================
CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal
Revenue
Service, any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to be used and cannot
be used
by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on the
taxpayer.
===========================================================
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information intended for the
exclusive
use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that
is
proprietary, privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying,
disclosure or
distribution of this information may be subject to legal restriction or sanction. Please
notify
the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended recipients and delete the
original
message without making any copies.
===========================================================
NOTIFICATION: Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP is an Illinois limited liability partnership
that has
elected to be governed by the Illinois Uniform Partnership Act (1997).
===========================================================

5