==============================  CFJ 1298  ==============================

    'Distributor' is a Patent Title which may be changed at the opinion
    of the Registrar.

========================================================================

Caller:                                 G.

Judge:                                  Razl
Judgement:                              FALSE

========================================================================

History:

Called by G.:                           31 May 2001 01:46:43 GMT
Assigned to Razl:                       05 Jun 2001 00:31:15 GMT
Judged FALSE by Razl:                   12 Jun 2001 03:39:34 GMT

========================================================================

Caller's Arguments:

Prior to Proposal 4141, "Distributor" was a unique Patent Title defined
in Rule 1923/5.  This definition was removed by Proposal 4141 resulting in
Rule 1923/6.  Rule 649 says of Patent Titles:

      When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person
      is said to Bear that Patent Title; the Patent Title is Borne
      by the person, and the person is its Bearor.  When a Patent
      Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that
      Patent Title.  The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be
      changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. Only persons may
      Bear Patent Titles.

No Rule "explicitly sets out" the revokation of a Patent Title when the
Rule defining it ceases to exist.  Therefore, a Patent Title is not
revoked by when its definition ceases to exist in the Rules.  Proposal
4141 stated "At the time of the Adoption of this Proposal, the Distributor
shall be Steve." which did not in any way change the identity or holder of
the Patent Title Distributor.

However, Rule 1670/13 does define the Distributor without using the word
"Patent Title", and says that "the person who is most responsible...in the
opinion of the Registrar...shall be known as the Distributor."

The questions to be clarified are:
  (1) is the person who "shall be known as" the Distributor the
      same as the Bearor of the Patent Title Distributor?
  (2) Does the opinion of the Registrar as to who "shall be known as"
      the Distributor (1670) *explicitly set out a method* of changing the
      "bearor of the Patent Title" Distributor as per 649?
  (3) Do both the Patent Title and person who is known as the distributor
      exist independently?  Or has the Patent Title somehow ceased to
      exist and been replaced by a Distributor not borne as a Patent
      Title?
  (4) Or is it possible that while Distributor remains a Patent Title,
      Rule 1670 does not "explictly allow" the changing of it as a
      Patent Title?

The single statement to be judged is one way narrow this question down.
A TRUE judgement will allow the Registrar to change the Distributor but
continue to require the Herald to track it---it is probably the most
"conservative" approach.

========================================================================

Judge Razl's Arguments:

On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 07:31:15PM -0500, Goethe wrote:
>       When a Patent Title is awarded to a person, that person
>       is said to Bear that Patent Title; the Patent Title is Borne
>       by the person, and the person is its Bearor.  When a Patent
>       Title is revoked from a person, that person ceases to Bear that
>       Patent Title.  The status of Bearing a Patent Title can only be
>       changed as explicitly set out in the Rules. Only persons may
>       Bear Patent Titles.

The player who currently bears the Patent Title of Distributor now
holds the title indefinitely, since the Proposal did not revoke that
Patent Title and the Ruleset currently contains no mechanism for
revoking that patent title.

On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 07:31:15PM -0500, Goethe wrote:
>   (1) is the person who "shall be known as" the Distributor the
>       same as the Bearor of the Patent Title Distributor?

These are separate entities.  Partly for expendiency, and because the
*Patent Title* of Distributor does not seem to be related to any other
part of the Ruleset.

On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 07:31:15PM -0500, Goethe wrote:
>   (2) Does the opinion of the Registrar as to who "shall be known as"
>       the Distributor (1670) *explicitly set out a method* of changing the
>       "bearor of the Patent Title" Distributor as per 649?

These are seperate entities.

On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 07:31:15PM -0500, Goethe wrote:
>   (3) Do both the Patent Title and person who is known as the distributor
>       exist independently?  Or has the Patent Title somehow ceased to
>       exist and been replaced by a Distributor not borne as a Patent
>       Title?

These are separate entities.

On Mon, Jun 04, 2001 at 07:31:15PM -0500, Goethe wrote:
>   (4) Or is it possible that while Distributor remains a Patent Title,
>       Rule 1670 does not "explictly allow" the changing of it as a
>       Patent Title?

Precisely.

========================================================================