pageok
pageok
pageok
Cat-Blogging:

From an arbitrator's decision in Morgan Stanley v. Meow, claim no. FA0604000671304:

Respondent maintains that it is a cat, that is, a well-known carnivorous quadruped which has long been domesticated. However, it is equally well-known that the common cat, whose scientific name is Felis domesticus, cannot speak or read or write. Thus, a common cat could not have submitted the Response (or even have registered the disputed domain name). Therefore, either Respondent is a different species of cat, such as the one that stars in the motion picture "Cat From Outer Space," or Respondent's assertion regarding its being a cat is incorrect.

If Respondent is in fact a cat from outer space, then it should have so indicated in its reply, in order to avoid unnecessary perplexity by the Panel. Further, it should have explained why a cat from outer space would allow Mr. Woods to use the disputed domain name. In the absence of such an explanation, the Panel must conclude that, if Respondent is a cat from outer space, then it may have something to hide, and this is indicative of bad faith behavior.

On the other hand, if Respondent's assertion regarding its being a cat is incorrect, then Respondent has undoubtedly attempted to mislead this Panel and has provided incorrect WHOIS information. Such behavior is indicative of bad faith. See Video Direct Distribs. Inc. v. Video Direct, Inc., FA 94724 (Nat. Arb. Forum June 5, 2000) (finding that the respondent acted in bad faith by providing incorrect information to the registrar regarding the owner of the registered name); see also Quixtar Invs., Inc. v. Smithberger, D2000-0138 (WIPO Apr. 19, 2000) (finding that use of false registration information constitutes bad faith).

Respondent cites Morgan Stanley v. Michael Woods, FA 604103 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 16, 2005), in which the Panel found that Complainant had failed to prove bad faith registration and use. But that case must be distinguished from the present case, because in that case the Respondent was Mr. Woods, and not a cat or someone who has misled the Panel by pretending to be a cat.

The Panel finds that Respondent's assertions that it is a cat provide sufficient evidence to conclude that the Respondent registered and is using the disputed domain name in bad faith. And this despite the fact that the Panel, unlike Queen Victoria, is amused.

Georg Felis (mail) (www):
Heheh. The cat should have gotten a blog :)
6.5.2006 6:49pm
byrd (mail):
I think the Panel is wrong in one major finding. Actually registering a name, thereby depriving a company of it, is a much more powerful teaching tool than merely claiming that such registration and deprivation is possible. And because all three factors must be met, Morgan Stanley's case should fail.

He should have put the cat on the stand.
6.5.2006 6:54pm
Splunge (mail):
Ha ha! On the Internet, no one can tell you're a...uh...oops. I guess they can after all. Damn.
6.5.2006 7:22pm
fffff:
<blockquote>
Respondent cites Morgan Stanley v. Michael Woods, FA 604103 (Nat. Arb. Forum Jan. 16, 2005), in which the Panel found that Complainant had failed to prove bad faith registration and use. But that case must be distinguished from the present case, because in that case the Respondent was Mr. Woods, and not a cat or someone who has misled the Panel by pretending to be a cat.
</blockquote>

Woah: the basis of the panel's decision with respect to the burden of proof is the Respondent's identity as a space cat. This seems like pure discrimination to me. Is this a sound jurisprudential basis for distinguishing cases? Should our society discriminate against space-borne, sentient felines? Do we really want <i>to be picking a fight with the fucking <b>space cats</b>, too?</i> Think about it.
6.5.2006 8:16pm
Apodaca:
Cats can't speak? Ahem: Miles v. City Council of Augusta, 710 F.2d 1542 n.5 (11th Cir. 1983) ("Blackie [the Talking Cat] can clearly speak for himself.")
6.5.2006 8:21pm
Silicon Valley Jim:
This is certainly a decision to give one paws.
6.5.2006 8:38pm
Frank Drackmann (mail):
Bucky Katt in "Get Fuzzy" talks and writes all the time.
6.5.2006 9:03pm
Average Joe (mail):
Cats can write and I have proof. Look up this article from the well-known and prestigious journal Physical Review Letters:
J. H. Hetherington and F. D. C. Willard,"Two-, Three-, and Four-Atom Exchange Effects in bcc 3He", Phys. Rev. Lett. 35, 1442--1444 (1975)
The abstract, for those who are interested is:

We have made mean-field calculations with a Hamiltonian obtained from two-, three-, and four-atom exchange in bcc solid 3He. We are able to fit the high-temperature experiments as well as the phase diagram of Kummer et al. at low temperatures. We find two kinds of antiferromagnetic phases as suggested by Kummer's experiments.

and, with regard to the topic of the post, F.D.C. Willard is a cat named Chester who was sired by a local tom named Willard. F.D. stands for Felix Domesticus . Hetherington's wife sleeps with both authors! All of this information can be found by googling "hetherington and willard" or can be found (assuming I get the link right) here
Therefore, cats can not only write, they can write high-quality technical articles on condensed matter physics for physics journals.
6.5.2006 9:30pm
Splunge (mail):
Therefore, cats can not only write, they can write high-quality technical articles on condensed matter physics.

That's nothing. The turds of some animals can write condensed-matter physics articles. ("Stronzo bestiale" is Italian for "animal shit.")
6.6.2006 12:35am
NickM (mail) (www):
Schrodinger's cat may have written a published article. ;-)

Nick
6.6.2006 4:37pm
Meryl Yourish (www):
I thought I saw that article, Nick. But perhaps I didn't.
6.6.2006 6:35pm
A. Zarkov (mail):
"Therefore, either Respondent is a different species of cat, such as the one that stars in the motion picture "Cat From Outer Space," ..."

One of my cats accidentally escaped after I moved into a new house. I looked high and low for him in the neighborhood without success. I knew he was outside as I saw him leave, and my neighbor saw him in his yard. Yet several hours later he materialized inside of my locked up and sealed house (sealed to prevent them from escaping). I can only assume he "beamed in." Observing my other cat's behavior over a period of 4 years, I concluded he was smarter than some humans I know (some with PhDs). I suspect they are actually aliens sent here to take data on an earthling. Now that that I see a cat can publish in Physical Review, I feel better.
6.6.2006 11:57pm
Frank Drackmann (mail):
Wow, I haven't heard the term "Hamiltonian" since Physical Chemistry in college.
6.7.2006 7:15pm