InterNIC (Network Solutions Inc.) Answer
and counterclaim for declaratory relief, in Roadrunner Computer Systems
v. NSI. A paragraphy by paragraph response to RCS's lawsuit against
NSI, to protect RCS's roadrunner.com domain name.
InfoLaw Alert article, "ROADRUNNER TO NETWORK
SOLUTIONS: SHAME ON YOU: Domain holder says Internet registry tried to
pull a fast one" by Mark Voorhees. June 18, 1996.
HTML version (w/links to author feedback, court docs, etc.) available at:
https://infolawalert.com/articles/960618.html
InterNIC (Network Solutions Inc.) motion to
dismiss, in Roadrunner Computer Systems v. NSI, claiming RCS has
presented to "genuine issues of material fact" to support their
motion for summary judgment, and that RCS's claims are now moot.
InfoLaw Alert article, "Keep Your Name: CAN
NETWORK SOLUTIONS ESCAPE RULING ON ITS INTERNET NAME POLICY?: Registry
wants Roadrunner case dismissed" by Mark Voorhees. Followup on the
Roadrunner v. NSI lawsuit. June 14, 1996.
HTML version (w/links to author feedback, court docs, etc.) available at:
https://infolawalert.com/stories/061496b.html
InterNIC (Network Solutions Inc.)
memorandum of points and authorities in support of motion for summary
judgement, in Roadrunner Computer Systems v. NSI. NSI moves to
have the case ruled moot, on the [unsupported, it turns out] claim
that the supposed trademark dispute between Roadrunner and TIME/Warner
is resolved, and therefore RCS's roadrunner.com domain name will not
be taken away.
David M. Graves (NSI/InterNIC) declaration in
RCS v. NSI, claiming that a supposed trademark dispute between
Roadrunner Computer Systems and TIME/Warner subsidiary Warner Bros.
had caused NSI to put RCS on notice that it stood to lose its
roadrunner.com domain name, that RCS did not take the required steps
to protect this domain name, and that the supposed dispute has been
resolved anyway.
Letter of Nils V. Montan (Warner) to Grant
L. Clark (NSI/InterNIC), regarding Warner's position on the
roadrunner.com domain name, and on Warner's attempts to negotiate with
Roadrunner Computer Systems. Cited in the Oppedahl declaration, etc.,
in Roadrunner v. NSI. [Note: Date is date of submission to court, not
date of letter itself.]
Stipulated order of the court preventing NSI
(the domain registration half of InterNIC) from taking away Roadrunner
Computer Systems' roadrunner.com domain name at the behest of
TIME/Warner Communications, who have a trademark on "Road Runner" in one
particular narrow category of commerce.
(Technically, the court ruled that Data Concepts' motion for injunction
is moot, as InterNIC agreed not to take away their dci.com domain name.
The court specifies that NSI cannot do this until & unless the court says
it can, e.g. if RCS and Warner were go to court over the roadrunner.com
domain name as it relates to trademark law, and RCS lost to
the Warner. The court did not rule on RCS's other substantive claims,
including monetary damages against NSI, or RCS's demands that NSI be
required to come up with a more sensible domain name policy.)
InfoLaw Alert article, "INTERNET NAME POLICY
DRAWS SUIT IT WAS INTENDED TO AVOID: Network Solutions Accused of Breach
of Contract" by Mark Voorhees. Details the Roadrunner v. NSI lawsuit.
Mar. 29, 1996.
HTML version (w/links to author feedback, court docs, etc.) available at:
https://infolawalert.com/stories/032996c.html
Letter from the Dialog trademark search service
detailing the various trademark registrations on "roadrunner" and
"road runner". Cited in the Oppedahl declaration in Roadrunner v. NSI.
Declaration of plaintiff's (RCS's) attorney in
Roadrunner Computer Systems v. NSI (InterNIC), including the fact that
a Dialog trademark search turned up 17 US trademark registrations for
"roadrunner" or "road runner", thereby clearly pointing out the
absurdity of NSI's InterNIC domain name policy, under which any
trademark holder can essentially steal or ruin a domain name of
another company or individual, *even if they have or obtain a
valid trademark on the domain name.* Declaration also cites the Montan
letter, and the Dolkas letter.
Original complaint (lawsuit) filed by Roadrunner
Computer Systems to prevent NSI (the domain registration half of
InterNIC) from taking away Roadrunner's roadrunner.com domain name at
the behest of TIME/Warner Communications, who have a trademark on
"Road Runner" in one particular narrow category of commerce. Unlike the
several similar cases, Roadrunner has been negotiating with Warner,
Warner itself does not appear to seek to take away roadrunner.com,
and the dispute really centers on problems in NSI's domain name policy.
In particular, NSI's policy would still have taken roadrunner.com away
from RCS, putting it "on hold", even though Warner did not ask
for this, even though their trademark isn't even on the same term (two
words, not one), and even though RCS has a valid trademark on
"roadrunner.com". Roadrunner Computer Systems is alledging breach of
contract on NSI's part, and this case more clearly that the others points
out the flaws in InterNIC domain name disput policy. This complaint
was subsequently replaced by an amended complaint.
amended complaint (lawsuit) filed by Roadrunner
Computer Systems to prevent NSI (the domain registration half of
InterNIC) from taking away Roadrunner's roadrunner.com domain name at
the behest of TIME/Warner Communications, who have a trademark on
"Road Runner" in one particular narrow category of commerce. Unlike the
several similar cases, Roadrunner has been negotiating with Warner,
Warner itself does not appear to seek to take away roadrunner.com,
and the dispute really centers on problems in NSI's domain name policy.
In particular, NSI's policy would still have taken roadrunner.com away
from RCS, putting it "on hold", even though Warner did not ask
for this, even though their trademark isn't even on the same term (two
words, not one), and even though RCS has a valid trademark on
"roadrunner.com". Roadrunner Computer Systems is alledging breach of
contract on NSI's part, and this case more clearly that the others points
out the flaws in InterNIC domain name disput policy. This complaint
replaced an earlier original complaint.
Roadrunner Computer Systems' president
Jane M. Hill's declaration in support of motion for preliminary
injunction, in RCS v. NSI (InterNIC). Lays out the details of why
RCS seeks to enjoin NSI from taking away RCS's domain name,
roadrunner.com, because of a supposed (but non-existent) trademark
conflict TIME/Warner Communications subsidiary, Warner Bros.
Roadrunner Computer Systems' memorandum
in support of motion for preliminary injunction. Lays out what harm
RCS would experience if NSI (InterNIC) were permitted to take away
RCS's roadrunner.com domain name, and gives RCS's understanding of the
facts behind the RCS v. NSI lawsuit.
Roadrunner Computer Systems'
opposition to Network Solutions Inc.'s motion for summary judgement
against RCS. NSI claims that the case is moot, but RCS begs to differ,
and details several problems, especially that NSI broke rules of candor,
that NSI has already cost RCS money, regardless of their claims (and
therefore that RCS's complaint for monetary damages is not moot), and
that RCS's substantive complaints against RCS for breach of contract are
are not moot either, nor is RCS's claim that NSI's InterNIC domain
registration policy endangers RCS far beyond this Warner-related dispute,
and should not apply to RCS in the first place, as RCS never agreed to
the new InterNIC policy. From RCS v. NSI lawsuit.
EFF "Legal Cases - Roadrunner v. NSI (InterNIC)" Archive
Files in this Archive
Subdirectories in This Archive
Related On-Site Resources
Links to Related Off-Site Resources