GTE New Media Services Inc. v. BellSouth Corp.
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
199 F.3d 1343 (2000)
- Written by Mike Cicero , JD
Facts
GTE New Media Services Inc. (GTE) (plaintiff) entered into an agreement with Netscape Communications Corp. (Netscape) (defendant), whereby Netscape included GTE’s SuperPages website in a menu of internet business directories accessible via a toolbar on Netscape’s website. In July 1997, however, Netscape terminated the arrangement by removing links to GTE’s SuperPages from both Netscape’s website and from a website managed by Yahoo! Inc. (Yahoo) (defendant). That same month, according to GTE, five regional Bell operating companies (collectively, BellSouth) (defendants) conspired with Netscape and Yahoo so that Netscape and Yahoo would provide links only to BellSouth’s competing Yellow Pages internet business-directory websites. GTE filed an antitrust action in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia against BellSouth, Netscape, and Yahoo. BellSouth moved to dismiss GTE’s complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction. The district court denied the motion but certified an order allowing BellSouth to file an interlocutory appeal. BellSouth then petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit for permission to file the appeal, which was granted. On appeal, GTE argued that BellSouth transacted business in the district whenever a resident accessed BellSouth’s Yellow Pages websites.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Edwards, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.





