%PDF-1.3
%%
%%Page: 1 1
4 0 obj
<<
/Length 5 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 664.5 Tm
/F1 13 Tf 100 Tz
88.1395 -8.4 Td
1.3 Tw
0 Tc
(FOR PUBLICATION) Tj
/F1 15 Tf 100 Tz
-78.2395 -24 Td
1.5 Tw
(UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS) Tj
43.47 -21.8 Td
(FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-53.37 -18 Td
1.2 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
0 0 Td
183.8 0 Td
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
-2.18 -17.6 Td
2 Tw
() Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-181.62 -2.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(G) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ARY) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( K) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, an individual,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
80.988 -13.2 Td
(Plaintiff-Appellant,) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-2.652 -18 Td
(and) Tj
-78.336 -18 Td
(O) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NLINE) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(LASSIFIEDS) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(., a) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(Delaware Company) Tj
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
131.652 -13.2 Td
(Plaintiff,) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-49.152 -18 Td
(v.) Tj
-82.5 -18 Td
(S) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(TEPHEN) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ICHAEL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OHEN) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, an) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(individual; O) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(CEAN) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( F) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(UND) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(I) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NTERNATIONAL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, L) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(TD) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(., a foreign) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(company; S) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(AND) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(AN) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(I) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NTERNACIONAL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( L) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(TD) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(., a foreign) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(company; S) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(PORTING) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( H) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUSES) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
215.07 -3.6 Td
1.2 Tw
(No. 01-15899) Tj
-215.07 -9.6 Td
(M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ANAGEMENT) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( C) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ORPORATION) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, a) Tj
226.734 -8.4 Td
(D.C. No.) Tj
-226.734 -4.8 Td
(Nevada company; S) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(PORTING) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
181.62 -3.1 Td
2 Tw
() Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
24.054 -5.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(CV-98-20718-JW) Tj
-205.674 -4.8 Td
(H) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUSES) Tj
2.12 Tw
( ) Tj
.79 Tw
(OF) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( A) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(MERICA) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, a Nevada) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(company; S) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(PORTING) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( H) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUSES) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
224.34 0 Td
1.2 Tw
(OPINION) Tj
-224.34 -13.2 Td
(G) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ENERAL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( I) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(., a Nevada company;) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(W) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ILLIAM) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( D) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OUGLAS) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, Sir, an) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(individual; VP B) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ANK) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( \(BVI\)) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(L) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(IMITED) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, a foreign company;) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(A) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NDREW) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( K) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(EULS) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, an individual;) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(M) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ONTANO) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( P) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ROPERTIES) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( LLC, a) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(California Limited Liability) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(Company; Y) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NATA) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( L) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(TD) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(.) Tj
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
121.008 -13.2 Td
(Defendant,) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-42.672 -18 Td
(and) Tj
-78.336 -18 Td
(N) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 8.4 Tf 101.1 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.2 Tw
(., a) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
(Delaware company) Tj
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
75.024 -13.2 Td
(Defendant-Appellee.) Tj
/F3 20 Tf 100 Tz
106.596 -8.8 Td
1.6 Ts
2 Tw
() Tj
0 Ts
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 664.5 cm
0 G
.9 w 0 -71.75 m 183.8 -71.75 l s
1.2 w 186.6 -284.1 m 186.6 -79.6 l s
1.2 w 186.6 -505.6 m 186.6 -301.1 l s
.9 w 0 -512.55 m 183.3 -512.55 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
292.25 -664.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10153) Tj
ET
Q
endstream
endobj
5 0 obj
5373
endobj
3 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F3 8 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 4 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 2 2
12 0 obj
<<
/Length 13 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
38.742 -8.4 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(Appeal from the United States District Court) Tj
17.442 -13.2 Td
(for the Northern District of California) Tj
.096 -13.2 Td
(James Ware, District Judge, Presiding) Tj
32.592 -26.2 Td
(Argued August 13, 2002) Tj
-67.704 -13.2 Td
(Submitted July 25, 2003San Francisco, California) Tj
80.694 -26.2 Td
(Filed July 25, 2003) Tj
-78.3 -26.2 Td
(Before: Alex) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Kozinski and M.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Margaret) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(McKeown,) Tj
-12.852 -13.2 Td
(Circuit) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Judges, and James) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(M.) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Fitzgerald,*) Tj
( District) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(Judge.) Tj
71.658 -26.2 Td
(Opinion by Judge Kozinski) Tj
1 0 0 1 156 189.7 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
148.5 -1 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
-138.5 -26 Td
2.63 Tw
(*The Honorable James M. Fitzgerald, Senior United States District) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(Judge for the District of Alaska, sitting by designation. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 189.7 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -12.75 m 300 -12.75 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10154) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
13 0 obj
1713
endobj
11 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 12 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 3 3
15 0 obj
<<
/Length 16 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
120.996 -27.6 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(COUNSEL) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-120.996 -26.2 Td
1 Tw
(James M. Wagstaffe, Kerr & Wagstaffe LLP, San Francisco,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.92 Tw
(California, argued for the appellant. Pamela Urueta and Alex) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(K. Grab joined him on the briefs. ) Tj
0 -26.2 Td
.15 Tw
(Kathryn E. Karcher, Gray Cary Ware & Freidenrich LLP, San) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
4.48 Tw
(Diego, California, argued for the appellee. David Henry) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(Dolkas and Mira A. Macias joined her on the briefs. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -8.15 m 300 -8.15 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10157) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
16 0 obj
1197
endobj
14 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 15 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 4 4
18 0 obj
<<
/Length 19 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
2.32 Tw
0 Tc
(Professor Brian E. Gray, San Francisco, California, amicus) Tj
0 -14 Td
1.2 Tw
(curiae in support of the appellant. ) Tj
0 -27.6 Td
2.7 Tw
(William H. Bode, Bode & Grenier, Washington, D.C., for) Tj
0 -14 Td
2.33 Tw
(amicus curiae American Internet Registrants Association in) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
1.2 Tw
(support of the appellant. ) Tj
0 -27.6 Td
2.47 Tw
(Robin D. Gross, Electronic Frontier Foundation, San Fran-) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
1.2 Tw
(cisco, California, amicus curiae in support of the appellant.) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
123.666 -46.7 Td
(OPINION) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-123.666 -27.6 Td
(KOZINSKI) Tj
(, Circuit Judge: ) Tj
12 -27.6 Td
2.16 Tw
(We decide whether Network Solutions may be liable for) Tj
-12 -13.9 Td
2.67 Tw
(giving away a registrant's domain name on the basis of a) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
1.2 Tw
(forged letter. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
118.326 -27.6 Td
(Background) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-106.326 -27.5 Td
1.58 Tw
(Sex on the Internet?,) Tj
( they all said. ) Tj
() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(That) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
('ll never make) Tj
-12 -13.9 Td
4.25 Tw
(any money.) Tj
( But computer-geek-turned-entrepreneur Gary) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
1.44 Tw
(Kremen knew an opportunity when he saw it. The year was) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
.24 Tw
(1994; domain names were free for the asking, and it would be) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
1.66 Tw
(several years yet before Henry Blodget and hordes of eager) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
1 Tw
(NASDAQ day traders would turn the Internet into the Dutch) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
1.63 Tw
(tulip craze of our times. With a quick e-mail to the domain) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
.67 Tw
(name registrar Network Solutions, Kremen became the proud) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
2.36 Tw
(owner of sex.com. He registered the name to his business,) Tj
0 -13.9 Td
1.2 Tw
(Online Classifieds, and listed himself as the contact.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(1) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -27.3 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
1.97 Tw
(1) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(We assume basic familiarity with the Internet. Those just tuning in) Tj
-10 -11.8 Td
1.03 Tw
(should read the helpful discussions in ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Kremen) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Cohen) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 325 F.3d 1035,) Tj
0 -11.8 Td
1.3 Tw
(1038-39 \(9th Cir. 2003\) \(order certifying question\), and ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Thomas) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Net-) Tj
0 -11.8 Td
1 Tw
(work Solutions, Inc.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 176 F.3d 500, 502-04 \(D.C. Cir. 1999\). ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -145.55 m 300 -145.55 l s
.5 w 0 -441.65 m 300 -441.65 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10158) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
19 0 obj
3299
endobj
17 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 18 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 5 5
22 0 obj
<<
/Length 23 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -8.4 Td
1.66 Tw
0 Tc
(Con man Stephen Cohen, meanwhile, was doing time for) Tj
-12 -13.4 Td
.21 Tw
(impersonating a bankruptcy lawyer. He, too, saw the potential) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.93 Tw
(of the domain name. Kremen had gotten it first, but that was) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.47 Tw
(only a minor impediment for a man of Cohen's boundless) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.96 Tw
(resource and bounded) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.96 Tw
(integrity. Once out of prison, he sent) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
4.03 Tw
(Network Solutions what purported to be a letter he had) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.28 Tw
(received from Online Classifieds. It claimed the company had) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.93 Tw
(been ) Tj
(forced to dismiss Mr. Kremen,) Tj
( but ) Tj
(never got around) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.41 Tw
(to changing our administrative contact with the internet regis-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.93 Tw
(tration [sic] and now our Board of directors has decided to) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.3 Td
1.57 Tw
(abandon) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( the domain name sex.com.) Tj
( Why was this unusual) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.22 Tw
(letter being sent via Cohen rather than to Network Solutions) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(directly? It explained: ) Tj
22 -26.5 Td
1.74 Tw
(Because we do not have a direct connection to the) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.03 Tw
(internet, we request that you notify the internet regis-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.96 Tw
(tration on our behalf, to delete our domain name) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.71 Tw
(sex.com. Further, we have no objections to your use) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.95 Tw
(of the domain name sex.com and this letter shall) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.71 Tw
(serve as our authorization to the internet registration) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(to transfer sex.com to your corporation.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(2) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
-22 -26.4 Td
1.91 Tw
(Despite the letter's transparent claim that a company called) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
3.61 Tw
() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Online) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Classifieds) Tj
( had no Internet connection, Network) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
4.5 Tw
(Solutions made no effort to contact Kremen. Instead, it) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.9 Tw
(accepted the letter at face value and transferred the domain) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.24 Tw
(name to Cohen. When Kremen contacted Network Solutions) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.61 Tw
(some time later, he was told it was too late to undo the trans-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.27 Tw
(fer. Cohen went on to turn sex.com into a lucrative online) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(porn empire. ) Tj
12 -26.4 Td
.7 Tw
(And so began Kremen's quest to recover the domain name) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
-2 -26.2 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
3.43 Tw
(2) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The letter was signed ) Tj
(Sharon Dimmick,) Tj
( purported president of) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
2.46 Tw
(Online Classifieds. Dimmick was actually Kremen's housemate at the) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.62 Tw
(time; Cohen later claimed she sold him the domain name for $1000. This) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.32 Tw
(story might have worked a little better if Cohen hadn't misspelled her sig-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(nature. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -432.85 m 300 -432.85 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10159) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
23 0 obj
3746
endobj
21 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 22 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 6 6
25 0 obj
<<
/Length 26 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.33 Tw
0 Tc
(that was rightfully his. He sued Cohen and several affiliated) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
3.53 Tw
(companies in federal court, seeking return of the domain) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.78 Tw
(name and disgorgement of Cohen's profits. The district court) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.47 Tw
(found that the letter was indeed a forgery and ordered the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.77 Tw
(domain name returned to Kremen. It also told Cohen to hand) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.53 Tw
(over his profits, invoking the constructive trust doctrine and) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.32 Tw
(California's ) Tj
(unfair competition) Tj
( statute, Cal. Bus. & Prof.) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.4 Tw
(Code ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.4 Tw
(17200 ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(et seq.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( It awarded $40 million in compensatory) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(damages and another $25 million in punitive damages.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(3) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
2.04 Tw
(Kremen, unfortunately, has not had much luck collecting) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
3.25 Tw
(his judgment. The district court froze Cohen's assets, but) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.67 Tw
(Cohen ignored the order and wired large sums of money to) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.17 Tw
(offshore accounts. His real estate property, under the protec-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.17 Tw
(tion of a federal receiver, was stripped of all its fixtures) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.87 Tw
(even cabinet doors and toiletsin violation of another order.) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.93 Tw
(The court commanded Cohen to appear and show cause why) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.47 Tw
(he shouldn't be held in contempt, but he ignored that order,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
5.37 Tw
(too. The district judge finally took off the gloveshe) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.04 Tw
(declared Cohen a fugitive from justice, signed an arrest war-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(rant and sent the U.S. Marshals after him. ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
.66 Tw
(Then things started getting ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(really) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( bizarre. Kremen put up a) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
3.43 Tw
(wanted) Tj
( poster on the sex.com site with a mug shot of) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.18 Tw
(Cohen, offering a $50,000 reward to anyone who brought him) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.22 Tw
(to justice. Cohen's lawyers responded with a motion to vacate) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.44 Tw
(the arrest warrant. They reported that Cohen was under house) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.33 Tw
(arrest in Mexico and that gunfights between Mexican authori-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.95 Tw
(ties and would-be bounty hunters seeking Kremen's reward) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.1 Tw
(money posed a threat to human life. The district court rejected) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1 Tw
(this story as ) Tj
(implausible) Tj
( and denied the motion. Cohen, so) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(far as the record shows, remains at large. ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
.45 Tw
(Given his limited success with the bounty hunter approach,) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
-2 -26 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.06 Tw
(3) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(We dismissed Cohen's appeal in an unpublished memorandum disposi-) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
.51 Tw
(tion. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(Kremen) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Cohen) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, Nos. 01-15886) Tj
(+) Tj
(, 2002 WL 2017073 \(9th Cir.) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(Aug. 30, 2002\). ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -455.35 m 300 -455.35 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10160) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
26 0 obj
3963
endobj
24 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 10 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 25 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 7 7
28 0 obj
<<
/Length 29 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
3.2 Tw
0 Tc
(it should come as no surprise that Kremen seeks to hold) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
.36 Tw
(someone else responsible for his losses. That someone is Net-) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
2.21 Tw
(work Solutions, the exclusive domain name registrar at the) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
1.77 Tw
(time of Cohen's antics. Kremen sued it for mishandling his) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
.63 Tw
(domain name, invoking four theories at issue here. He argues) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
3.87 Tw
(that he had an implied contract with Network Solutions,) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
1.37 Tw
(which it breached by giving the domain name to Cohen. He) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
.04 Tw
(also claims the transfer violated Network Solutions's coopera-) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
3 Tw
(tive agreement with the National Science Foundationthe) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
1.9 Tw
(government contract that made Network Solutions the .com) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
.41 Tw
(registrar. His third theory is that he has a property right in the) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
.51 Tw
(domain name sex.com, and Network Solutions committed the) Tj
0 -14.3 Td
2.4 Tw
(tort of conversion by giving it away to Cohen. Finally, he) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
1.44 Tw
(argues that Network Solutions was a ) Tj
(bailee) Tj
( of his domain) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
1.57 Tw
(name and seeks to hold it liable for ) Tj
(conversion by bailee.) Tj
() Tj
12 -28.3 Td
2.08 Tw
(The district court granted summary judgment in favor of) Tj
-12 -14.2 Td
2.7 Tw
(Network Solutions on all claims. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kremen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Cohen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 99 F.) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
1.02 Tw
(Supp. 2d 1168 \(N.D. Cal. 2000\). It held that Kremen had no) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
2.04 Tw
(implied contract with Network Solutions because there was) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
.25 Tw
(no consideration: Kremen had registered the domain name for) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
1.11 Tw
(free. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 1171-72. It rejected the third-party contract claim) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
.55 Tw
(on the ground that the cooperative agreement did not indicate) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
2.71 Tw
(a clear intent to grant enforceable contract rights to regis-) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(trants. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 1172. ) Tj
12 -28.3 Td
2.37 Tw
(The conversion claims fared no better. The court agreed) Tj
-12 -14.2 Td
2.24 Tw
(that sex.com was Kremen's property. It concluded, though,) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
.53 Tw
(that it was intangible property to which the tort of conversion) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
1.57 Tw
(does not apply. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 1173. The conversion by bailee claim) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
2.08 Tw
(failed for the additional reason that Network Solutions was) Tj
0 -14.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(not a bailee. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 1175. ) Tj
12 -28.2 Td
.82 Tw
(Kremen appeals, and we consider each of his four theories) Tj
-12 -14.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(in turn. ) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10161) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
29 0 obj
3535
endobj
27 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 28 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 8 8
32 0 obj
<<
/Length 33 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
99.48 -8.4 Td
1.2 Tw
0 Tc
(Breach of Contract) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
-87.48 -26.2 Td
2.25 Tw
([1]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Kremen had no express contract with Network Solu-) Tj
-12 -13.3 Td
1.03 Tw
(tions, but argues that his registration created an implied con-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
3.95 Tw
(tract, which Network Solutions breached. A defendant is) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3 Tw
(normally not liable for breach of contract, however, if he) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.44 Tw
(promised to do something for free. ) Tj
(The party claiming breach) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.4 Tw
(must show that, in return for the promise, it conferred some) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.04 Tw
(benefit the other party was not already entitled to receive, or) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.41 Tw
(suffered some prejudice it was not already bound to endure.) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
5.1 Tw
(Cal. Civ. Code ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
5.1 Tw
(1605.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(4) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The adequacy of consideration) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.3 Tw
(doesn't matter, but it must be ) Tj
(something of real value.) Tj
() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.2 Td
1.88 Tw
(Herbert) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Lankershim) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 9 Cal. 2d 409, 475 \(1937\) \(internal) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(quotation marks omitted\). ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
1.16 Tw
(Kremen did not pay Network Solutions or exchange some) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
.3 Tw
(other property in return for his domain name. Nor did his reg-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.8 Tw
(istration increase the amount of money Network Solutions) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.1 Tw
(received from the National Science Foundation; under the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.71 Tw
(cooperative agreement, Network Solutions was paid on a) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.16 Tw
(fixed-fee basis. The cooperative agreement did contemplate) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.87 Tw
(that Network Solutions might one day charge fees. Kremen) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.18 Tw
(seizes on this fact and claims he conferred a benefit on Net-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1 Tw
(work Solutions by becoming a customer ) Tj
(at a time when [it]) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(was eager to expand its customer base.) Tj
( ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
.2 Tw
(The problem with this theory is that Kremen was a nonpay-) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.43 Tw
(ing customer, so his status as a registrant was valuable only) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.73 Tw
(because of the possibility he might stick around if Network) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.46 Tw
(Solutions started charging fees. Kremen was under no obliga-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.76 Tw
(tion to do so. He was in the same position as one who prom-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.05 Tw
(ises to do something but reserves the right to change his mind.) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.2 Td
1.57 Tw
(See, e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(County of Alameda) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Ross) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 32 Cal. App. 2d 135,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.16 Tw
(143-44 \(1939\); 1 Witkin ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Contracts) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
3.16 Tw
(234. He might have) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
3.47 Tw
(4) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Neither party argued choice of law, so we apply California law) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
1.56 Tw
(throughout. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(McGhee) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Arabian Am. Oil Co.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 871 F.2d 1412, 1424) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(\(9th Cir. 1989\). ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -455.35 m 300 -455.35 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10162) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
33 0 obj
4128
endobj
31 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 32 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 9 9
35 0 obj
<<
/Length 36 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.27 Tw
0 Tc
(become a paying customer or he might not; the choice was up) Tj
0 -13 Td
3.53 Tw
(to him once Network Solutions started charging fees. As) Tj
0 -13 Td
1 Tw
(many Internet investors found out the hard way, ) Tj
([m]ere . . .) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.45 Tw
(hope of profit is not consideration.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Williams) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Hasshagen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(166 Cal. 386, 390 \(1913\). ) Tj
12 -26 Td
2.42 Tw
(Kremen argues that he gave Network Solutions valuable) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.16 Tw
(marketing data by submitting his contact information when he) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.66 Tw
(registered the domain name. But there is no evidence that) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.45 Tw
(Network Solutions sought the data as part of its benefit of the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.5 Tw
(bargain. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(Bard) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kent) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 19 Cal. 2d 449, 452 \(1942\). It col-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.81 Tw
(lected only information reasonably necessary to complete the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.88 Tw
(registration process. Any marketing value it had was an inci-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.57 Tw
(dental consequence of the process. This is not a case where) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.11 Tw
(a party's actions can only be explained as a gimmick to col-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4 Tw
(lect customer information; Network Solutions was giving) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.14 Tw
(away domain names because the National Science Foundation) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.96 Tw
(was paying it to do so. Knowledge of the recipient's identity) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.36 Tw
(is a nearly inevitable consequence of any gift. Absent evi-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.7 Tw
(dence it was actually something the donor bargained for, it is) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(not consideration. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
3.91 Tw
([2]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Kremen did not give consideration for his domain) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
3.11 Tw
(name, so he had no contract with Network Solutions. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Cf.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.53 Tw
(Oppedahl & Larson) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Network Solutions, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 3 F. Supp. 2d) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(1147, 1160-61 \(D. Colo. 1998\). ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
66.048 -26 Td
(Breach of Third-Party Contract) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
-54.048 -26 Td
1.67 Tw
([3]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( We likewise reject Kremen's argument based on Net-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
3.33 Tw
(work Solutions's cooperative agreement with the National) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.12 Tw
(Science Foundation. A party can enforce a third-party con-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.75 Tw
(tract only if it reflects an ) Tj
(express or implied intention of the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.66 Tw
(parties to the contract to benefit the third party.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Klamath) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.16 Tw
(Water Users Protective Ass'n) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Patterson) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 204 F.3d 1206,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.3 Tw
(1211 \(9th Cir. 1999\). ) Tj
(The intended beneficiary need not be) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.28 Tw
(specifically or individually identified in the contract, but must) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.93 Tw
(fall within a class clearly intended by the parties to benefit) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10163) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
36 0 obj
3918
endobj
34 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 35 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 10 10
38 0 obj
<<
/Length 39 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.74 Tw
0 Tc
(from the contract.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( When a contract is with a government) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.11 Tw
(entity, a more stringent test applies: ) Tj
(Parties that benefit . . .) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.62 Tw
(are generally assumed to be incidental beneficiaries, and may) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.64 Tw
(not enforce the contract absent a clear intent to the contrary.) Tj
() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
.97 Tw
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The contract must establish not only an intent to confer a) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.72 Tw
(benefit, but also ) Tj
(an intention . . . to grant [the third party]) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(enforceable rights.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.1 Td
1.16 Tw
([4]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Kremen relies on language in the agreement providing) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.51 Tw
(that Network Solutions had ) Tj
(primary responsibility for ensur-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.75 Tw
(ing the quality, timeliness and effective management of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.25 Tw
([domain name] registration services) Tj
( and that it was supposed) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.12 Tw
(to ) Tj
(facilitate the most effective, efficient and ubiquitous regis-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.62 Tw
(tration services possible.) Tj
( This language does not indicate a) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.77 Tw
(clear intent to grant registrants enforceable contract rights.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.83 Tw
(We accordingly reject Kremen's claim. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Cf. ) Tj
(Oppedahl & Lar-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(son) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 3 F. Supp. 2d at 1157-59. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
120.666 -26.1 Td
(Conversion) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
-108.666 -26.1 Td
.46 Tw
([5]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Kremen's conversion claim is another matter. To estab-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.11 Tw
(lish that tort, a plaintiff must show ) Tj
(ownership or right to pos-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.37 Tw
(session of property, wrongful disposition of the property right) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.3 Tw
(and damages.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(G.S. Rasmussen & Assocs., Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kalitta Fly-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.14 Tw
(ing Serv., Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 958 F.2d 896, 906 \(9th Cir. 1992\). The prelim-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.85 Tw
(inary question, then, is whether registrants have property) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.95 Tw
(rights in their domain names. Network Solutions all but con-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.23 Tw
(cedes that they do. This is no surprise, given its positions in) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.03 Tw
(prior litigation. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(Network Solutions, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Umbro Int'l,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3 Tw
(Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 529 S.E.2d 80, 86 \(Va. 2000\) \() Tj
([Network Solutions]) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.41 Tw
(acknowledged during oral argument before this Court that the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.48 Tw
(right to use a domain name is a form of intangible personal) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.94 Tw
(property.) Tj
(\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Network Solutions, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Clue Computing, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.46 Tw
(946 F. Supp. 858, 860 \(D. Colo. 1996\) \(same\).) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(5) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The district) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(court agreed with the parties on this issue, as do we. ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.88 Tw
(5) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Network Solutions does suggest in passing that we should distinguish) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
.5 Tw
(domain names supported by contracts from those \(like Kremen's\) that are) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -466.55 m 300 -466.55 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10164) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
39 0 obj
4406
endobj
37 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 38 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 11 11
41 0 obj
<<
/Length 42 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -8.4 Td
.03 Tw
0 Tc
([6]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Property is a broad concept that includes ) Tj
(every intangi-) Tj
-12 -13.4 Td
.16 Tw
(ble benefit and prerogative susceptible of possession or dispo-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.96 Tw
(sition. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Downing) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Mun. Court) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 88 Cal. App. 2d 345, 350) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
5.61 Tw
(\(1948\) \(internal quotation marks omitted\). We apply a) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.16 Tw
(three-part test to determine whether a property right exists:) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.74 Tw
(First, there must be an interest capable of precise definition;) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.52 Tw
(second, it must be capable of exclusive possession or control;) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.47 Tw
(and third, the putative owner must have established a legiti-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.03 Tw
(mate claim to exclusivity.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(G.S. Rasmussen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 958 F.2d at 903) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.42 Tw
(\(footnote omitted\). Domain names satisfy each criterion. Like) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.47 Tw
(a share of corporate stock or a plot of land, a domain name) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.03 Tw
(is a well-defined interest. Someone who registers a domain) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.33 Tw
(name decides where on the Internet those who invoke that) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.25 Tw
(particular namewhether by typing it into their web brows-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.85 Tw
(ers, by following a hyperlink, or by other meansare sent.) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.55 Tw
(Ownership is exclusive in that the registrant alone makes that) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
3.61 Tw
(decision. Moreover, like other forms of property, domain) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.87 Tw
(names are valued, bought and sold, often for millions of dol-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.23 Tw
(lars, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Greg Johnson, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(The Costly Game for Net Names) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, L.A.) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.27 Tw
(Times, Apr. 10, 2000, at A1, and they are now even subject) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(to in rem jurisdiction, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( 15 U.S.C. ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.2 Tw
(1125\(d\)\(2\). ) Tj
12 -26.5 Td
1.75 Tw
(Finally, registrants have a legitimate claim to exclusivity.) Tj
-12 -13.3 Td
.44 Tw
(Registering a domain name is like staking a claim to a plot of) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.42 Tw
(land at the title office. It informs others that the domain name) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.44 Tw
(is the registrant's and no one else's. Many registrants also) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.5 Tw
(invest substantial time and money to develop and promote) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.12 Tw
(websites that depend on their domain names. Ensuring that) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.25 Tw
(they reap the benefits of their investments reduces uncertainty) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.28 Tw
(and thus encourages investment in the first place, promoting) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.58 Tw
(the growth of the Internet overall. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(G.S. Rasmussen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 958) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(F.2d at 900. ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -26.1 Td
1.53 Tw
(not. It also stresses that Kremen didn't develop the sex.com site before) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.36 Tw
(Cohen stole it. But this focus on the particular domain name at issue is) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.86 Tw
(misguided. The question is not whether Kremen's domain name in isola-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.7 Tw
(tion is property, but whether domain names as a class are a species of) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(property. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -432.85 m 300 -432.85 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10165) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
42 0 obj
4192
endobj
40 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 41 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 12 12
44 0 obj
<<
/Length 45 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -8.4 Td
.18 Tw
0 Tc
([7]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Kremen therefore had an intangible property right in his) Tj
-12 -13 Td
1.62 Tw
(domain name, and a jury could find that Network Solutions) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.75 Tw
(wrongful[ly] dispos[ed] of) Tj
( that right to his detriment by) Tj
0 -13 Td
.66 Tw
(handing the domain name over to Cohen. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 906. The dis-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.83 Tw
(trict court nevertheless rejected Kremen's conversion claim.) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.53 Tw
(It held that domain names, although a form of property, are) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(intangibles not subject to conversion. This rationale derives) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.88 Tw
(from a distinction tort law once drew between tangible and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.57 Tw
(intangible property: Conversion was originally a remedy for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.36 Tw
(the wrongful taking of another's lost goods, so it applied only) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.56 Tw
(to tangible property. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(Prosser and Keeton on the Law of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.39 Tw
(Torts) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.39 Tw
(15, at 89, 91 \(W. Page Keeton ed., 5th ed. 1984\). Vir-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3 Tw
(tually every jurisdiction, however, has discarded this rigid) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.3 Tw
(limitation to some degree. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 91. Many courts ignore) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.73 Tw
(or expressly reject it. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(Kremen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 325 F.3d at 1045-46 n.5) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.32 Tw
(\(Kozinski, J., dissenting\) \(citing cases\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Astroworks, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v.) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
.77 Tw
(Astroexhibit, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 257 F. Supp. 2d 609, 618 \(S.D.N.Y. 2003\)) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(\(holding that the plaintiff could maintain a claim for conver-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.13 Tw
(sion of his website\); Val D. Ricks, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(The Conversion of Intangi-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.32 Tw
(ble Property: Bursting the Ancient Trover Bottle with New) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.8 Tw
(Wine) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 1991 B.Y.U. L. Rev. 1681, 1682. Others reject it for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.33 Tw
(some intangibles but not others. The ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, for exam-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(ple, recommends the following test:) Tj
22 -26 Td
2.9 Tw
(\(1\)) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
2.9 Tw
(Where there is conversion of a document in) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.83 Tw
(which intangible rights are merged, the damages) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(include the value of such rights. ) Tj
0 -26 Td
2.56 Tw
(\(2\)) Tj
9 Tw
( ) Tj
2.56 Tw
(One who effectively prevents the exercise of) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.65 Tw
(intangible rights of the kind customarily ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(merged in) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.46 Tw
(a document) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( is subject to a liability similar to that for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(conversion, even though the document is not itself) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(converted. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
-22 -26 Td
6.38 Tw
(Restatement \(Second\) of Torts) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
6.38 Tw
(242 \(1965\) \(emphasis) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.3 Tw
(added\). An intangible is ) Tj
(merged) Tj
( in a document when, ) Tj
(by) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.43 Tw
(the appropriate rule of law, the right to the immediate posses-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.06 Tw
(sion of a chattel and the power to acquire such possession is) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10166) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
45 0 obj
4129
endobj
43 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 30 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 44 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 13 13
47 0 obj
<<
/Length 48 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.78 Tw
0 Tc
(represented by) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( [the] document,) Tj
( or when ) Tj
(an intangible obli-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.21 Tw
(gation [is] ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(represented by) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( [the] document, which is regarded) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.55 Tw
(as equivalent to the obligation.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( cmt. a \(emphasis added\).) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(6) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.3 Td
.6 Tw
(The district court applied this test and found no evidence that) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(Kremen's domain name was merged in a document. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.4 Td
1.08 Tw
([8]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The court assumed that California follows the ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Restate-) Tj
-12 -13.3 Td
.74 Tw
(ment) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( on this issue. Our review, however, revealed that ) Tj
(there) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.07 Tw
(do not appear to be any California cases squarely addressing) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.63 Tw
(whether the `merged with' requirement is a part of California) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.36 Tw
(law.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kremen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 325 F.3d at 1042. We invoked the California) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.67 Tw
(Supreme Court's certification procedure to offer it the oppor-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.69 Tw
(tunity to address the issue. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 1043; ) Tj
(Cal. Rules of Court) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.57 Tw
(29.8. The Court declined, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kremen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Cohen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, No. S112591) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(\(Cal. Feb. 25, 2003\), and the question now falls to us. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.4 Td
5 Tw
([9]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( We conclude that California does not follow the) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
-12 -13.3 Td
1.66 Tw
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
('s strict merger requirement. Indeed, the leading) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.9 Tw
(California Supreme Court case rejects the tangibility require-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.7 Tw
(ment altogether. In ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Payne) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Elliot) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 54 Cal. 339 \(1880\), the) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.5 Tw
(Court considered whether shares in a corporation \(as opposed) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.62 Tw
(to the share certificates themselves\) could be converted. It) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.3 Tw
(held that they could, reasoning: ) Tj
([T]he action no longer exists) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.91 Tw
(as it did at common law, but has been developed into a rem-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.3 Tw
(edy for the conversion of ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(every species of personal property) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(.) Tj
() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.3 Td
.03 Tw
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 341 \(emphasis added\). While ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Payne) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
('s outcome might be) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.75 Tw
(reconcilable with the ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, its rationale certainly is) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.11 Tw
(not: It recognized conversion of shares, not because they are) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
0 Tw
(customarily represented by share certificates, but because they) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.34 Tw
(are a species of personal property and, perforce, protected. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(at 342.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(7) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26.2 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.56 Tw
(6) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( does note that conversion ) Tj
(has been applied by some) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
.7 Tw
(courts in cases where the converted document is not in itself a symbol of) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
2.77 Tw
(the rights in question, but is merely essential to their protection and) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(enforcement, as in the case of account books and receipts.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( cmt. b. ) Tj
10 -14 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.83 Tw
(7) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Intangible interests in ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(real) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( property, on the other hand, remain unpro-) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
.34 Tw
(tected by conversion, presumably because trespass is an adequate remedy.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -418.85 m 300 -418.85 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10167) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
48 0 obj
5053
endobj
46 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 47 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 14 14
51 0 obj
<<
/Length 52 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -8.4 Td
.05 Tw
0 Tc
(Notwithstanding ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Payne) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
('s seemingly clear holding, the Cali-) Tj
-12 -13.4 Td
.36 Tw
(fornia Court of Appeal held in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Olschewski) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Hudson) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 87 Cal.) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.63 Tw
(App. 282 \(1927\)) Tj
(, that a laundry route was not subject to con-) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
1.11 Tw
(version. It explained that ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Payne) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
('s rationale was ) Tj
(too broad a) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.52 Tw
(statement as to the application of the doctrine of conversion.) Tj
() Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.4 Td
2.66 Tw
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 288) Tj
(. Rather than follow binding California Supreme) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
2.46 Tw
(Court precedent, the court retheorized ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Payne) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( and held that) Tj
0 -13.4 Td
.85 Tw
(corporate stock could be converted only because it was ) Tj
(rep-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
3.11 Tw
(resented by) Tj
( a tangible document. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(; ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see also ) Tj
(Adkins) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v.) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.3 Td
.23 Tw
(Model Laundry Co.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 92 Cal. App. 575, 583 \(1928\) \(relying on) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.3 Td
.63 Tw
(Olschewski) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( and holding that no property right inhered in ) Tj
(the) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.16 Tw
(intangible interest of an exclusive privilege to collect laun-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(dry\). ) Tj
12 -26.5 Td
.3 Tw
(Were ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Olschewski) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( the only relevant case on the books, there) Tj
-12 -13.3 Td
3.16 Tw
(might be a plausible argument that California follows the) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.3 Td
3.05 Tw
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(. But in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Palm Springs-La Quinta Development) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.14 Tw
(Co.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kieberk Corp.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 46 Cal. App. 2d 234 \(1941\), the court) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1 Tw
(of appeal allowed a conversion claim for intangible informa-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.22 Tw
(tion in a customer list when some of the index cards on which) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
4.38 Tw
(the information was recorded were destroyed. The court) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.57 Tw
(allowed damages not just for the value of the cards, but for) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
2.1 Tw
(the value of the intangible information lost. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 239.) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1 Tw
(Section 242\(1\) of the ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, however, allows recovery) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
.47 Tw
(for intangibles only if they are merged in the converted docu-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.33 Tw
(ment. Customer information is not merged in a document in) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.5 Tw
(any meaningful sense. A Rolodex is not like a stock certifi-) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.87 Tw
(cate that actually ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(represents) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( a property interest; it is only a) Tj
0 -13.3 Td
1.2 Tw
(means of recording information. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.4 Td
0 Tw
(Palm Springs) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( and ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Olschewski) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( are reconcilable on their facts) Tj
-12 -13.3 Td
4.14 Tw
(the former involved conversion of the document itself) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -26.1 Td
.67 Tw
(See ) Tj
(Goldschmidt) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Maier) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 73 P. 984, 985 \(Cal. 1903\) \(per curiam\) \() Tj
([A]) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.98 Tw
(leasehold of real estate is not the subject of an action of trover.) Tj
(\); ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Vuich) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -11.2 Td
1.39 Tw
(v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Smith) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 140 Cal. App. 453, 455 \(1934\) \(same\). Some California cases) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.03 Tw
(also preserve the traditional exception for indefinite sums of money. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(5 Witkin ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Torts) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1 Tw
(614. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -432.85 m 300 -432.85 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10168) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
52 0 obj
4945
endobj
50 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 51 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 15 15
54 0 obj
<<
/Length 55 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.23 Tw
0 Tc
(while the latter did not. But this distinction can't be squared) Tj
0 -13 Td
.28 Tw
(with the ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(. The plaintiff in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Palm Springs) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( recovered) Tj
0 -13 Td
.63 Tw
(damages for the value of his intangibles. But if those intangi-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.47 Tw
(bles were merged in the index cards for purposes of section) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.78 Tw
(242\(1\), the plaintiffs in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Olschewski) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( and ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Adkins) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( should have) Tj
0 -13 Td
3.23 Tw
(recovered under section 242\(2\)laundry routes surely are) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.61 Tw
(customarily written down ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(somewhere) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(. ) Tj
(Merged) Tj
( can't mean) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.2 Tw
(one thing in one section and something else in the other. ) Tj
12 -25.9 Td
1.22 Tw
(California courts ignored the ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( again in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(A & M) Tj
-12 -13 Td
.63 Tw
(Records, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Heilman) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 75 Cal. App. 3d 554 \(1977\), which) Tj
0 -13 Td
.67 Tw
(applied the tort to a defendant who sold bootlegged copies of) Tj
0 -13 Td
.78 Tw
(musical recordings. The court held broadly that ) Tj
(such misap-) Tj
0 -13 Td
3.41 Tw
(propriation and sale of the intangible property of another) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.47 Tw
(without authority from the owner is conversion.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 570.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.2 Tw
(It gave no hint that its holding depended on whether the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.08 Tw
(owner's intellectual property rights were merged in some doc-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.7 Tw
(ument. One might imagine physical things with which the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
5.05 Tw
(intangible was associatedfor example, the medium on) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.96 Tw
(which the song was recorded. But an intangible intellectual) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.39 Tw
(property right in a song is not merged in a phonograph record) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.03 Tw
(in the sense that the record ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(represents) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( the composer's intellec-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.36 Tw
(tual property right. The record is not like a certificate of own-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.5 Tw
(ership; it is only a medium for one instantiation of the artistic) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(work.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(8) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
12 -25.9 Td
.08 Tw
(Federal cases applying California law take an equally broad) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.43 Tw
(view. We have applied ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(A & M Records) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( to intellectual prop-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.41 Tw
(erty rights in an audio broadcast, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see ) Tj
(Lone Ranger Television,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.36 Tw
(Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Program Radio Corp.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 740 F.2d 718, 725 \(9th Cir.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
(1984\), and to a regulatory filing, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see ) Tj
(G.S. Rasmussen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 958) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -25.8 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
1.44 Tw
(8) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The California Court of Appeal addressed the issue most recently in) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
-10 -11.1 Td
1.26 Tw
(Thrifty-Tel, Inc.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Bezenek) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 46 Cal. App. 4th 1559 \(1996\), which noted) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
.03 Tw
(that courts had ) Tj
(traditionally) Tj
( refused to acknowledge conversion of intan-) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
.78 Tw
(gibles ) Tj
(not merged with, or reflected in, something tangible) Tj
(.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( at 1565) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
.47 Tw
(\(citing ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Olschewski) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( and ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Adkins) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(\). The court declined to decide whether that) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
.76 Tw
(limitation was still good law and resolved the case on other grounds. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
0 -11.1 Td
1 Tw
(id.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( at 1565-66. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -411.25 m 300 -411.25 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10169) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
55 0 obj
4969
endobj
53 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 54 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 16 16
57 0 obj
<<
/Length 58 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
.6 Tw
0 Tc
(F.2d at 906-07. Like ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(A & M Records) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, both decisions defy the) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13 Td
.96 Tw
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
('s ) Tj
(merged in a document) Tj
( test. An audio broad-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.4 Tw
(cast may be recorded on a tape and a regulatory submission) Tj
0 -13 Td
0 Tw
(may be typed on a piece of paper, but neither document ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(repre-) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.2 Tw
(sents) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( the owner's intangible interest. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
3.38 Tw
(The Seventh Circuit interpreted California law in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(FMC) Tj
-12 -13 Td
2.95 Tw
(Corp.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Capital Cities/ABC, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 915 F.2d 300 \(7th Cir.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(1990\). Observing that ) Tj
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.07 Tw
(`[t]here is perhaps no very valid and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.7 Tw
(essential reason why there might not be conversion' of intan-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
(gible property,) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 305 \(quoting ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Prosser & Keeton) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(supra) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.19 Tw
() Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.19 Tw
(15, at 92\), it held that a defendant could be liable merely for) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(depriving the plaintiff of the use of his confidential informa-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.77 Tw
(tion, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 304. In rejecting the tangibility requirement, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(FMC) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
.83 Tw
(echoes ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Payne) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
('s holding that personal property of any species) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.11 Tw
(may be converted. And it flouts the ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( because the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3 Tw
(intangible property right in confidential information is not) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1 Tw
(represented by the documents on which the information hap-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(pens to be recorded. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
2.52 Tw
(Our own recent decision in ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Bancroft & Masters, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v.) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
-12 -13.1 Td
.16 Tw
(Augusta National Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 223 F.3d 1082 \(9th Cir. 2000\), is espe-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.47 Tw
(cially relevant. That case involved a domain nameprecisely) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.17 Tw
(the type of property at issue here. The primary question was) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2 Tw
(personal jurisdiction, but a majority of the panel joined the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.16 Tw
(judgment only on the understanding that the defendant had) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.96 Tw
(committed conversion of a domain name, which it character-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.1 Tw
(ized as ) Tj
(tortious conduct.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( at 1089 \(Sneed & Trott, JJ.,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.22 Tw
(concurring\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(cf. ) Tj
(Astroworks, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 257 F. Supp. 2d at 618) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.07 Tw
(\(holding that the plaintiff could maintain a claim for conver-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(sion of his website\). ) Tj
12 -26 Td
.45 Tw
(In short, California does not follow the ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
('s strict) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.47 Tw
(requirement that some document must actually represent the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.16 Tw
(owner's intangible property right. On the contrary, courts rou-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.16 Tw
(tinely apply the tort to intangibles without inquiring whether) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.03 Tw
(they are merged in a document and, while it's often possible) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.87 Tw
(to dream up ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(some) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( document the intangible is connected to in) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10170) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
58 0 obj
4484
endobj
56 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 57 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 17 17
60 0 obj
<<
/Length 61 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
3.12 Tw
0 Tc
(some fashion, it's seldom one that represents the owner's) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.53 Tw
(property interest. T) Tj
(o the extent ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Olschewski) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( endorses the strict) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
2.13 Tw
(merger rule, it is against the weight of authority. That rule) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.58 Tw
(cannot be squared with a jurisprudence that recognizes con-) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.62 Tw
(version of music recordings, radio shows, customer lists, reg-) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
4.05 Tw
(ulatory filings, confidential information and even domain) Tj
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -12.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(names.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(9) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -25.4 Td
1.21 Tw
([10]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Were it necessary to settle the issue once and for all,) Tj
-12 -12.8 Td
.39 Tw
(we would toe the line of ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Payne) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( and hold that conversion is ) Tj
(a) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.85 Tw
(remedy for the conversion of every species of personal prop-) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.48 Tw
(erty. 54 Cal. at 341. But we need not do so to resolve this) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.42 Tw
(case. Assuming ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(arguendo) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( that California retains some vesti-) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
2.25 Tw
(gial merger requirement, it is clearly minimal, and at most) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
3.5 Tw
(requires only ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(some) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( connection to a document or tangible) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.78 Tw
(objectnot representation of the owner's intangible interest) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(in the strict ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( sense. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -25.4 Td
.18 Tw
([11]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Kremen's domain name falls easily within this class of) Tj
-12 -12.8 Td
.44 Tw
(property. He argues that the relevant document is the Domain) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.61 Tw
(Name System, or ) Tj
(DNS) Tj
(the distributed electronic database) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
3.04 Tw
(that associates domain names like sex.com with particular) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.44 Tw
(computers connected to the Internet.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
(10) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( We agree that the DNS) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -25.3 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
2.58 Tw
(9) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Witkin cites the ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( favorably) Tj
(. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(5 Witkin ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Torts) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
2.58 Tw
(613.) Tj
-10 -10.8 Td
2.22 Tw
(Notably, though, he points to only three cases rejecting conversion of) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
2.58 Tw
(intangibles: ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Olschewski) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( \(which disavowed binding California Supreme) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
2.72 Tw
(Court authority directly on point, ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(see) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( p. 10168 ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(supra) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(\); ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Vuich) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( \(which) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
1.2 Tw
(involved real estate and so was not within ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Payne) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
('s holding anyway, ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(see) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
0 -10.9 Td
.72 Tw
(n.7 ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(supra) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(\); and ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Italiani) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Corp.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 45 Cal. App. 2d) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
.17 Tw
(464 \(1941\) \(which denied protection to intellectual property rights and has) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
1.13 Tw
(been overtaken by later cases such as ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(A & M Records) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( and ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Lone Ranger) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
1 Tw
(Television) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(see) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( pp. 10169-70 ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(supra) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(\). ) Tj
10 -13.7 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.03 Tw
(10) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Network Solutions complains about the absence of specific record evi-) Tj
-10 -10.9 Td
1.81 Tw
(dence regarding the DNS. But whether domain names are a species of) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
1.25 Tw
(property to which conversion applies is a question of law rather than of) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
.08 Tw
(adjudicative fact; we may consider record evidence but need not so restrict) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
1.54 Tw
(ourselves. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Fed. R. Evid. 201\(a\) advisory committee notes. Network) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
.96 Tw
(Solutions has had ample opportunity to contest the nature of the DNS in) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
.72 Tw
(both its answering brief on appeal and its response to amici. It has raised) Tj
0 -10.9 Td
1 Tw
(no material point of dispute. ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -300.95 m 300 -300.95 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10171) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
61 0 obj
5563
endobj
59 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 60 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 18 18
63 0 obj
<<
/Length 64 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
0 Tw
0 Tc
(is a document \(or perhaps more accurately a collection of doc-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.3 Tw
(uments\). That it is stored in electronic form rather than on ink) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.73 Tw
(and paper is immaterial. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See, e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Thrifty-Tel) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 46 Cal. App.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.28 Tw
(4th at 1565 \(recognizing conversion of information recorded) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.52 Tw
(on floppy disk\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(A & M Records) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 75 Cal. App. 3d at 570) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.63 Tw
(\(same for audio record\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Lone Ranger Television) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 740 F.2d at) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.77 Tw
(725 \(same for magnetic tape\). It would be a curious jurispru-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.34 Tw
(dence that turned on the existence of a ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(paper) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( document rather) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
0 Tw
(than an electronic one. Torching a company's file room would) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.41 Tw
(then be conversion while hacking into its mainframe and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.53 Tw
(deleting its data would not. That is not the law, at least not in) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(California.) Tj
4.9 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
.5 Tw
(11) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
1.2 Tw
( ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.1 Td
4.75 Tw
([12]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The DNS also bears some relation to Kremen's) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.17 Tw
(domain name. We need not delve too far into the mechanics) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.15 Tw
(of the Internet to resolve this case. It is sufficient to observe) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.32 Tw
(that information correlating Kremen's domain name with a) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.33 Tw
(particular computer on the Internet must exist somewhere in) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.25 Tw
(some form in the DNS; if it did not, the database would not) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
3.12 Tw
(serve its intended purpose. Change the information in the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.77 Tw
(DNS, and you change the website people see when they type) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(www.sex.com.) Tj
( ) Tj
12 -26.2 Td
3.18 Tw
(Network Solutions quibbles about the mechanics of the) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.77 Tw
(DNS. It points out that the data corresponding to Kremen's) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.96 Tw
(domain name is not stored in a single record, but is found in) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.5 Tw
(several different places: The components of the domain name) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.17 Tw
(\() Tj
(sex) Tj
( and ) Tj
(com) Tj
(\) are stored in two different places, and each) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.11 Tw
(is copied and stored on several machines to create redundancy) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
10 -26 Td
4.1 Ts
/F5 6 Tf 100 Tz
1.33 Tw
(11) Tj
0 Ts
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(The ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( requires intangibles to be merged only in a ) Tj
(docu-) Tj
-10 -11.2 Td
.22 Tw
(ment, not a ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(tangible) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( document. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Restatement \(Second\) of Torts) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.22 Tw
(242. Our) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.17 Tw
(holding therefore does not depend on whether electronic records are tangi-) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.57 Tw
(ble. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Compare ) Tj
(eBay, Inc.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Bidder's Edge, Inc.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 100 F. Supp. 2d 1058,) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.5 Tw
(1069 \(N.D. Cal. 2000\) \() Tj
([I]t appears likely that the electronic signals sent) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.83 Tw
(by [Bidder's Edge] to retrieve information from eBay's computer system) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
.85 Tw
(are . . . sufficiently tangible to support a trespass cause of action.) Tj
(\), ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(with) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(Intel Corp.) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 10 Tf 100 Tz
(Hamidi) Tj
/F2 10 Tf 100 Tz
(, 2003 WL 21488209, at *11 \(Cal. June 30, 2003\)) Tj
0 -11.2 Td
1 Tw
(\(implying that electronic signals are intangible\). ) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 cm
0 G
.5 w 0 -388.15 m 300 -388.15 l s
Q
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10172) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
64 0 obj
4677
endobj
62 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 49 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
/F5 20 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 63 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 19 19
66 0 obj
<<
/Length 67 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
3.51 Tw
0 Tc
(and speed up response times. Network Solutions's theory) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.92 Tw
(seems to be that intangibles are not subject to conversion) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.2 Tw
(unless they are associated only with a ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(single) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( document. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
.2 Tw
(Even if Network Solutions were correct that there is no sin-) Tj
-12 -13 Td
3.5 Tw
(gle record in the DNS architecture with which Kremen's) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.12 Tw
(intangible property right is associated, that is no impediment) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.17 Tw
(under California law. A share of stock, for example, may be) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.63 Tw
(evidenced by more than one document. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See ) Tj
(Payne) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 54 Cal. at) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.44 Tw
(342 \() Tj
([T]he certificate is only evidence of the property; and) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.02 Tw
(it is not the only evidence, for a transfer on the books of the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.47 Tw
(corporation, without the issuance of a certificate, vests title in) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
0 Tw
(the shareholder: the certificate is, therefore, but additional evi-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.75 Tw
(dence of title . . . .) Tj
(\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see also ) Tj
(Phansalkar) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Andersen Wein-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.16 Tw
(roth & Co.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 175 F. Supp. 2d 635, 640-42 \(S.D.N.Y. 2001\)) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.03 Tw
(\(citing ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Payne) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(\). A customer list is protected, even if it's) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.64 Tw
(recorded on index cards rather than a single piece of paper.) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
2.47 Tw
(See ) Tj
(Palm Springs) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 46 Cal. App. 2d 234. Audio recordings) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.5 Tw
(may be duplicated, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see ) Tj
(A & M Records) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 75 Cal. App. 3d 554;) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.1 Td
.2 Tw
(Lone Ranger Television) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 740 F.2d 718) Tj
(, and confidential infor-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.91 Tw
(mation and regulatory filings may be photocopied, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(see ) Tj
(FMC) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.7 Tw
(915 F.2d 300; ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(G.S. Rasmussen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 958 F.2d 896) Tj
(. Network Solu-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(tions's ) Tj
(single document) Tj
( theory is unsupported. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
.73 Tw
(Network Solutions also argues that the DNS is not a docu-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
.26 Tw
(ment because it is refreshed every twelve hours when updated) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.04 Tw
(domain name information is broadcast across the Internet.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.14 Tw
(This theory is even less persuasive. A document doesn't cease) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.3 Tw
(being a document merely because it is often updated. If that) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.07 Tw
(were the case, a share registry would fail whenever sharehold-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.11 Tw
(ers were periodically added or dropped, as would an address) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
6.2 Tw
(file whenever business cards were added or removed.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.41 Tw
(Whether a document is updated by inserting and deleting par-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.21 Tw
(ticular records or by replacing an old file with an entirely new) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(one is a technical detail with no legal significance. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
0 Tw
([13]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Kremen's domain name is protected by California con-) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.27 Tw
(version law, even on the grudging reading we have given it.) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10173) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
67 0 obj
4177
endobj
65 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 68 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 66 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 20 20
70 0 obj
<<
/Length 71 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.66 Tw
0 Tc
(Exposing Network Solutions to liability when it gives away) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.42 Tw
(a registrant's domain name on the basis of a forged letter is) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.58 Tw
(no different from holding a corporation liable when it gives) Tj
0 -13 Td
2.57 Tw
(away someone's shares under the same circumstances. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See) Tj
0 -13 Td
.81 Tw
(Schneider) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Union Oil Co.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 6 Cal. App. 3d 987, 992 \(1970\);) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13 Td
1.18 Tw
(Ralston) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Bank of Cal.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 112 Cal. 208, 213 \(1896\). We have) Tj
0 -13 Td
3 Tw
(not ) Tj
(creat[ed] new tort duties) Tj
( in reaching this result. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Cf.) Tj
0 -13 Td
1.6 Tw
(Moore) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Regents of the Univ. of Cal.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 51 Cal. 3d 120, 146) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.46 Tw
(\(1990\). We have only applied settled principles of conversion) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.23 Tw
(law to what the parties and the district court all agree is a spe-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(cies of property. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26 Td
1.32 Tw
([14]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The district court supported its contrary holding with) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
2.78 Tw
(several policy rationales, but none is sufficient grounds to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.77 Tw
(depart from the common law rule. The court was reluctant to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.51 Tw
(apply the tort of conversion because of its strict liability) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.78 Tw
(nature. This concern rings somewhat hollow in this case) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.34 Tw
(because the district court effectively exempted Network Solu-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.14 Tw
(tions from liability to Kremen altogether, whether or not it) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.71 Tw
(was negligent. Network Solutions made no effort to contact) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.55 Tw
(Kremen before giving away his domain name, despite receiv-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.2 Tw
(ing a facially suspect letter from a third party. A jury would) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
(be justified in finding it was unreasonably careless. ) Tj
12 -26 Td
2.57 Tw
(We must, of course, take the broader view, but there is) Tj
-12 -13.1 Td
1.25 Tw
(nothing unfair about holding a company responsible for giv-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.02 Tw
(ing away someone else's property even if it was not at fault.) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.23 Tw
(Cohen is obviously the guilty party here, and the one who) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.5 Tw
(should in all fairness pay for his theft. But he's skipped the) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.11 Tw
(country, and his money is stashed in some offshore bank) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
4.85 Tw
(account. Unless Kremen's luck with his bounty hunters) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.92 Tw
(improves, Cohen is out of the picture. The question becomes) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
(whether Network Solutions should be open to liability for its) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
1.53 Tw
(decision to hand over Kremen's domain name. Negligent or) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.3 Tw
(not, it was Network Solutions that gave away Kremen's prop-) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
2.07 Tw
(erty. Kremen never did anything. It would not be unfair to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
3.22 Tw
(hold Network Solutions responsible and force ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(it) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( to try to) Tj
0 -13.1 Td
.48 Tw
(recoup its losses by chasing down Cohen. This, at any rate, is) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10174) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
71 0 obj
4005
endobj
69 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 68 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 70 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 21 21
73 0 obj
<<
/Length 74 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
1.5 Tw
0 Tc
(the logic of the common law, and we do not lightly discard) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
1.2 Tw
(it. ) Tj
12 -25.3 Td
1.07 Tw
(The district court was worried that ) Tj
(the threat of litigation) Tj
-12 -12.7 Td
1 Tw
(threatens to stifle the registration system by requiring further) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
.81 Tw
(regulations by [Network Solutions] and potential increases in) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
1.5 Tw
(fees.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Kremen) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 99 F. Supp. 2d at 1174. Given that Network) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
1.16 Tw
(Solutions's ) Tj
(regulations) Tj
( evidently allowed it to hand over a) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
.07 Tw
(registrant's domain name on the basis of a facially suspect let-) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
1.9 Tw
(ter without even contacting him, ) Tj
(further regulations) Tj
( don't) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
1.88 Tw
(seem like such a bad idea. And the prospect of higher fees) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
1.15 Tw
(presents no issue here that it doesn't in any other context. A) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
.66 Tw
(bank could lower its ATM fees if it didn't have to pay secur-) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
.16 Tw
(ity guards, but we doubt most depositors would think that was) Tj
0 -12.7 Td
1.2 Tw
(a good idea. ) Tj
12 -25.3 Td
.16 Tw
(The district court thought there were ) Tj
(methods better suited) Tj
-12 -12.8 Td
1.18 Tw
(to regulate the vagaries of domain names) Tj
( and left it ) Tj
(to the) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
2.71 Tw
(legislature to fashion an appropriate statutory scheme.) Tj
( ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Id.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -12.8 Td
0 Tw
(The legislature, of course, is always free \(within constitutional) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.23 Tw
(bounds\) to refashion the system that courts come up with. But) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1 Tw
(that doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and let pri-) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.46 Tw
(vate relations degenerate into a free-for-all in the meantime.) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.66 Tw
(We apply the common law until the legislature tells us other-) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.1 Tw
(wise. And the common law does not stand idle while people) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(give away the property of others. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -25.3 Td
2.05 Tw
([15]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( The evidence supported a claim for conversion, and) Tj
-12 -12.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(the district court should not have rejected it. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
94.464 -25.3 Td
(Conversion by Bailee) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
-82.464 -25.4 Td
3.1 Tw
(Kremen's complaint finally alleges a separate claim for) Tj
-12 -12.8 Td
2.1 Tw
(conversion by bailee.) Tj
( The district court granted summary) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
.51 Tw
(judgment, holding that Network Solutions was not a bailee of) Tj
0 -12.8 Td
1.2 Tw
(Kremen's property. ) Tj
12 -25.4 Td
1.5 Tw
(We need not decide the issue because Kremen's ) Tj
(conver-) Tj
-12 -12.8 Td
.15 Tw
(sion by bailee) Tj
( claim does not state a cause of action indepen-) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
428.5 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10175) Tj
-205.15 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
74 0 obj
3500
endobj
72 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 68 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 73 0 R
>>
endobj
%%Page: 22 22
76 0 obj
<<
/Length 77 0 R
>>
stream
q
BT
0 Tr
0 g
1 0 0 1 156 643.5 Tm
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -8.4 Td
3.22 Tw
0 Tc
(dent of his conversion claim. As we read California law,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.9 Tw
(conversion by bailee) Tj
( is not a distinct tort, but merely the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.11 Tw
(tort of conversion committed by one who is a bailee. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(See, e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(,) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.2 Td
3.36 Tw
(Byer) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Can. Bank of Commerce) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 8 Cal. 2d 297, 300-01) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.26 Tw
(\(1937\); ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Gonzales) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Pers. Storage, Inc.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 56 Cal. App. 4th 464,) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.45 Tw
(476-77 \(1997\); 4 Witkin ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Personal Property) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
1.45 Tw
(138; 5 Witkin) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.2 Td
.25 Tw
(Torts) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
0 Tw
( ) Tj
.25 Tw
(622. Kremen's complaint does not allege any claim of) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
2.28 Tw
(bailee liability other than conversion. ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Cf., e.g.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, ) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
(Windeler) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( v.) Tj
/F4 12 Tf 100 Tz
0 -13.2 Td
1.14 Tw
(Scheers Jewelers) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
(, 8 Cal. App. 3d 844, 850-52 \(1970\) \(negli-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.55 Tw
(gent breach of the bailment contract\). To prove ) Tj
(conversion) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
.44 Tw
(by bailee,) Tj
( Kremen must establish all the elements of conver-) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.66 Tw
(sion but, having done so, he gains nothing by also showing) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(that Network Solutions is a bailee.) Tj
129 -26.2 Td
(*) Tj
24 0 Td
(*) Tj
24 0 Td
(*) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
-165 -26.2 Td
1.11 Tw
([16]) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( Kremen had a viable claim for conversion. The judg-) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.88 Tw
(ment of the district court is reversed on this count, and the) Tj
0 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(case is remanded for further proceedings. ) Tj
/F1 12 Tf 100 Tz
12 -26.2 Td
8.93 Tw
(AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and) Tj
-12 -13.2 Td
1.2 Tw
(REMANDED. No costs.) Tj
/F2 12 Tf 100 Tz
( ) Tj
1 0 0 1 0 792 Tm
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
156 -136.5 Td
1.1 Tw
0 Tc
(10176) Tj
67.35 0 Td
(K) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(REMEN) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( v. N) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(ETWORK) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
( S) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(OLUTIONS) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(, I) Tj
/F2 7.7 Tf 101.2 Tz
.79 Tw
(NC) Tj
/F2 11 Tf 100 Tz
0 Ts
1.1 Tw
(.) Tj
ET
Q
q
1 0 0 1 0 792 cm
0 G
.5 w 156 -140.25 m 456 -140.25 l s
Q
endstream
endobj
77 0 obj
2737
endobj
75 0 obj
<<
/Type /Page
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
/Parent 68 0 R
/Resources <<
/Font <<
/F1 6 0 R
/F2 7 0 R
/F4 9 0 R
>>
/ProcSet 1 0 R
>>
/Contents 76 0 R
>>
endobj
1 0 obj
[ /PDF /Text ]
endobj
78 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
79 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Times-Bold
/Flags 34
/FontBBox [ -168 -218 1000 935 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 139.00
/StemH 69.50
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 676
/XHeight 461
/Ascent 676
/Descent -205
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
6 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F1
/BaseFont /Times-Bold
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 570 570 570 570 570 300 300
250 333 555 500 500 1000 833 333 333 333 500 570 250 333 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 333 333 570 570 570 500
930 722 667 722 722 667 611 778 778 389 500 778 667 944 722 778
611 778 722 556 667 722 722 1000 722 722 667 333 278 333 581 500
333 500 556 444 556 444 333 500 556 278 333 556 278 833 556 500
556 556 444 389 333 556 500 722 500 500 444 394 220 394 520 400
722 556 444 500 500 500 500 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 722 722
667 611 556 500 500 500 556 556 500 778 722 722 722 722 722 667
500 333 500 500 167 500 500 500 500 278 500 500 333 333 556 556
667 500 500 500 250 667 540 350 333 500 500 500 1000 1000 722 500
500 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 556 333 333 300 333 333 333
1000 722 556 250 250 250 556 389 722 500 556 667 444 747 747 1000
389 1000 389 300 389 389 778 778 667 778 1000 330 778 778 722 722
722 722 722 500 750 278 750 750 278 500 722 556 278 500 500 220 ]
/Encoding 78 0 R
/FontDescriptor 79 0 R
>>
endobj
80 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
81 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Times-Roman
/Flags 34
/FontBBox [ -168 -218 1000 898 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 84.00
/StemH 42.00
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 662
/XHeight 450
/Ascent 683
/Descent -217
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
7 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F2
/BaseFont /Times-Roman
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 564 564 564 564 564 300 300
250 333 408 500 500 833 778 333 333 333 500 564 250 333 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 278 278 564 564 564 444
921 722 667 667 722 611 556 722 722 333 389 722 611 889 722 722
556 722 667 556 611 722 722 944 722 722 611 333 278 333 469 500
333 444 500 444 500 444 333 500 500 278 278 500 278 778 500 500
500 500 333 389 278 500 500 722 500 500 444 480 200 480 541 400
667 500 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 722 722
611 556 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 722 722 722 722 722 722 611
444 333 500 500 167 500 500 500 500 180 444 500 333 333 556 556
611 500 500 500 250 611 453 350 333 444 444 500 1000 1000 722 444
500 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 500 333 333 300 333 333 333
1000 722 500 250 250 250 556 389 722 500 500 611 444 760 760 980
333 889 333 276 333 333 722 722 611 722 889 310 722 722 722 722
722 667 722 444 750 278 750 750 278 500 722 500 278 500 500 200 ]
/Encoding 80 0 R
/FontDescriptor 81 0 R
>>
endobj
82 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 240 /apple ]
>>
endobj
83 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Symbol
/Flags 4
/FontBBox [ -180 -293 1090 1010 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 85.00
/StemH 42.50
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 0
/XHeight 0
/Ascent 0
/Descent 0
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
8 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F3
/BaseFont /Symbol
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 333 713 500 549 833 778 439 333 333 500 549 250 549 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 278 278 549 549 549 444
549 722 667 722 612 611 763 603 722 333 631 722 686 889 722 722
768 741 556 592 611 690 439 768 645 795 611 333 863 333 658 500
500 631 549 549 494 439 521 411 603 329 603 549 549 576 521 549
549 521 549 603 439 576 713 686 493 686 494 480 200 480 549 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 620 247 549 167 713 500 753 753 753 753 1042 987 603 987 603
400 549 411 549 549 713 494 460 549 549 549 549 1000 603 1000 658
823 686 795 987 768 768 823 768 768 713 713 713 713 713 713 713
768 713 790 250 250 250 549 250 713 603 603 1042 987 603 987 603
494 329 790 790 786 713 384 384 384 384 384 384 494 494 494 494
790 329 274 686 686 686 384 384 384 384 384 384 494 494 494 250 ]
/Encoding 82 0 R
/FontDescriptor 83 0 R
>>
endobj
84 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
85 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Times-Italic
/Flags 98
/FontBBox [ -169 -217 1010 883 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 76.00
/StemH 38.00
/ItalicAngle -15.50
/CapHeight 653
/XHeight 441
/Ascent 683
/Descent -205
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
9 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F4
/BaseFont /Times-Italic
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250
250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 250 675 675 675 675 675 300 300
250 333 420 500 500 833 778 333 333 333 500 675 250 333 250 278
500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 333 333 675 675 675 500
920 611 611 667 722 611 611 722 722 333 444 667 556 833 667 722
611 722 611 500 556 722 611 833 611 556 556 389 278 389 422 500
333 500 500 444 500 444 278 500 500 278 278 444 278 722 500 500
500 500 389 389 278 500 444 667 444 444 389 400 275 400 541 400
667 500 444 500 500 500 500 444 444 444 444 278 278 278 611 611
611 611 500 500 500 500 500 500 444 722 722 611 611 611 611 611
500 389 500 500 167 500 500 500 500 214 556 500 333 333 500 500
611 500 500 500 250 611 523 350 333 556 556 500 889 1000 722 500
500 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 500 333 333 300 333 333 333
889 667 500 250 250 250 500 389 556 444 500 556 389 760 760 980
333 889 333 276 333 333 722 722 556 722 944 310 722 722 722 722
722 667 556 500 750 278 750 750 278 500 667 500 278 500 500 275 ]
/Encoding 84 0 R
/FontDescriptor 85 0 R
>>
endobj
86 0 obj
<<
/Type /Encoding
/Differences [ 219 /Zcaron 135 /ccedilla 152 /ydieresis 243 /atilde 140 /icircumflex
31 /threesuperior 136 /ecircumflex 146 /thorn 138 /egrave 30 /twosuperior 130 /eacute
254 /otilde 155 /Aacute 147 /ocircumflex 217 /yacute 129 /udieresis 247 /threequarters
131 /acircumflex 190 /Eth 137 /edieresis 151 /ugrave 223 /trademark 149 /ograve 215 /scaron
228 /Idieresis 218 /uacute 133 /agrave 210 /ntilde 134 /aring 220 /zcaron 226 /Icircumflex
209 /Ntilde 150 /ucircumflex 159 /Ecircumflex 224 /Iacute 128 /Ccedilla 153 /Odieresis
214 /Scaron 176 /Edieresis 229 /Igrave 132 /adieresis 236 /Ograve 181 /Egrave 242 /Ydieresis
221 /registered 237 /Otilde 244 /onequarter 240 /Ugrave 239 /Ucircumflex 145 /Thorn
25 /divide 158 /Atilde 238 /Uacute 231 /Ocircumflex 29 /logicalnot 143 /Aring 139 /idieresis
252 /iacute 160 /aacute 27 /plusminus 26 /multiply 154 /Udieresis 28 /minus 204 /onesuperior
144 /Eacute 156 /Acircumflex 222 /copyright 157 /Agrave 148 /odieresis 253 /oacute 127 /degree
141 /igrave 201 /mu 230 /Oacute 192 /eth 142 /Adieresis 216 /Yacute 255 /brokenbar 246 /onehalf
]
>>
endobj
87 0 obj
<<
/Type /FontDescriptor
/FontName /Helvetica-Bold
/Flags 32
/FontBBox [ -170 -228 1003 962 ]
/MissingWidth 250
/StemV 140.00
/StemH 70.00
/ItalicAngle 0.00
/CapHeight 718
/XHeight 532
/Ascent 718
/Descent -207
/Leading 0
/MaxWidth 0
/AvgWidth 0
>>
endobj
20 0 obj
<<
/Type /Font
/Subtype /Type1
/Name /F5
/BaseFont /Helvetica-Bold
/FirstChar 0
/LastChar 255
/Widths [ 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278
278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 278 584 584 584 584 584 333 333
278 333 474 556 556 889 722 278 333 333 389 584 278 333 278 278
556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 333 333 584 584 584 611
975 722 722 722 722 667 611 778 722 278 556 722 611 833 722 778
667 778 722 667 611 722 667 944 667 667 611 333 278 333 584 556
278 556 611 556 611 556 333 611 611 278 278 556 278 889 611 611
611 611 389 556 333 611 556 778 556 556 500 389 280 389 584 400
722 611 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 556 278 278 278 722 722
667 667 611 611 611 611 611 611 556 778 722 722 722 722 722 667
556 333 556 556 167 556 556 556 556 238 500 556 333 333 611 611
667 556 556 556 278 667 556 350 278 500 500 556 1000 1000 722 611
611 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 333 611 333 333 333 333 333 333
1000 722 611 278 278 278 667 556 667 556 611 611 500 737 737 1000
278 1000 278 370 278 278 778 778 611 778 1000 365 778 778 722 722
722 889 667 556 834 278 834 834 278 611 944 611 278 611 611 280 ]
/Encoding 86 0 R
/FontDescriptor 87 0 R
>>
endobj
10 0 obj
<<
/Kids [3 0 R 11 0 R 14 0 R 17 0 R 21 0 R 24 0 R]
/Count 6
/Type /Pages
/Parent 88 0 R
>>
endobj
30 0 obj
<<
/Kids [27 0 R 31 0 R 34 0 R 37 0 R 40 0 R 43 0 R]
/Count 6
/Type /Pages
/Parent 88 0 R
>>
endobj
49 0 obj
<<
/Kids [46 0 R 50 0 R 53 0 R 56 0 R 59 0 R 62 0 R]
/Count 6
/Type /Pages
/Parent 88 0 R
>>
endobj
68 0 obj
<<
/Kids [65 0 R 69 0 R 72 0 R 75 0 R]
/Count 4
/Type /Pages
/Parent 88 0 R
>>
endobj
88 0 obj
<<
/Kids [10 0 R 30 0 R 49 0 R 68 0 R]
/Count 22
/Type /Pages
/MediaBox [0 0 612 792]
>>
endobj
2 0 obj
<<
/Type /Catalog
/Pages 88 0 R
>>
endobj
89 0 obj
<<
/CreationDate (Wednesday July 23, 2003 15:13:35)
/Creator (VERSACOMP R05.2)
/Producer (ECMP5)
>>
endobj
xref
0 90
0000000000 65535 f
0000094262 00000 n
0000107020 00000 n
0000005499 00000 n
0000000044 00000 n
0000005476 00000 n
0000095727 00000 n
0000098379 00000 n
0000099933 00000 n
0000102580 00000 n
0000106454 00000 n
0000007511 00000 n
0000005713 00000 n
0000007487 00000 n
0000008987 00000 n
0000007705 00000 n
0000008963 00000 n
0000012565 00000 n
0000009181 00000 n
0000012541 00000 n
0000105231 00000 n
0000016613 00000 n
0000012782 00000 n
0000016589 00000 n
0000020878 00000 n
0000016830 00000 n
0000020854 00000 n
0000024715 00000 n
0000021095 00000 n
0000024691 00000 n
0000106570 00000 n
0000029145 00000 n
0000024932 00000 n
0000029121 00000 n
0000033365 00000 n
0000029362 00000 n
0000033341 00000 n
0000038063 00000 n
0000033572 00000 n
0000038039 00000 n
0000042559 00000 n
0000038282 00000 n
0000042535 00000 n
0000046980 00000 n
0000042766 00000 n
0000046956 00000 n
0000052337 00000 n
0000047199 00000 n
0000052313 00000 n
0000106687 00000 n
0000057586 00000 n
0000052556 00000 n
0000057562 00000 n
0000062847 00000 n
0000057793 00000 n
0000062823 00000 n
0000067635 00000 n
0000063066 00000 n
0000067611 00000 n
0000073502 00000 n
0000067854 00000 n
0000073478 00000 n
0000078483 00000 n
0000073721 00000 n
0000078459 00000 n
0000082964 00000 n
0000078702 00000 n
0000082940 00000 n
0000106804 00000 n
0000087261 00000 n
0000083171 00000 n
0000087237 00000 n
0000091053 00000 n
0000087468 00000 n
0000091029 00000 n
0000094082 00000 n
0000091260 00000 n
0000094058 00000 n
0000094295 00000 n
0000095447 00000 n
0000096947 00000 n
0000098099 00000 n
0000099595 00000 n
0000099667 00000 n
0000101145 00000 n
0000102297 00000 n
0000103795 00000 n
0000104947 00000 n
0000106907 00000 n
0000107076 00000 n
trailer
<<
/Size 90
/Root 2 0 R
/Info 89 0 R
>>
startxref
107213
%%EOF
2 0 obj<>
endobj
89 0 obj<>
endobj
90 0 obj<>
endobj
91 0 obj<>stream
Wednesday July 23, 2003 15:13:35
ECMP5
VERSACOMP R05.2
2007-05-19T15:33:21-04:00
2007-05-19T15:33:21-04:00
2007-05-19T15:33:21-04:00
application/pdf
Gary Kremen, et al. v. Stephen Michael Cohen, et al.
uuid:73c277b8-a918-4323-800a-0770c84a905c
uuid:70f87801-2c2d-4336-b0f6-91105565f4ea
endstream
endobj
xref
2 1
0000109105 00000 n
89 3
0000109166 00000 n
0000109334 00000 n
0000109588 00000 n
trailer
<]/Prev 107213 >>
startxref
113314
%%EOF