Chocolate Persians, Chocolate Delights, Chocolate Mocha, Catinallity Cattery, Sandpipers Persians, Himalayan Kittens, Precious Persians, AKA Lollimops Himalayan & Persian Cattery "Annie's" 6 different webistes to deceive her buyers this is a commerical cat breeder buyers beware do not buy from her Escondido, California

This is the image of all her complaints since 2002
to read more about her history go to:
http://ca-catbreeders.info/articles-catinallity.html

Buyers please do not be fooled this breeder is wicked and a professtional thief.

1. Purpose and Character of Your Use If you use another's copyrighted work for the purpose of criticism, news reporting, or commentary, this use will weigh in favor of fair use.
 
See Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, 510 U.S. 569, 578 (1994). Purposes such as these are often considered "in the public interest" and are favored by the courts over uses that merely seek to profit from anothers work. Online Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc., 337 F. Supp. 2d 1195, 1203 (N.D. Cal. 2004). When you put copyrighted material to new use, this furthers the goal of copyright to "promote the progress of science and useful arts."
In evaluating the purpose and character of your use, a court will look to whether the new work you've created is "transformative" and adds a new meaning or message. To be transformative, a use must add to the original "with a further purpose or different character, altering the first with new expression, meaning, or message." Campbell, 510 U.S. at 579. Although transformative use is not absolutely necessary, the more transformative your use is, the less you will have to show on the remaining three factors.
A common misconception is that any for-profit use of someone else's work is not fair use and that any not-for-profit use is fair. In actuality, some for-profit uses are fair and some not-for-profit uses are not; the result depends on the circumstances. Courts originally presumed that if your use was commercial it was an unfair exploitation. They later abandoned that assumption because many of the possible fair uses of a work listed in section 107's preamble, such as uses for purposes of news reporting, are conducted for profit. Although courts still consider the commercial nature of the use as part of their analysis, they will not brand a transformative use unfair simply because it makes a profit. Accordingly, the presence of advertising on a website would not, in of itself, doom ones claim to fair use.
If you merely reprint or repost a copyrighted work without anything more, however, it is less likely to qualify for protection under this prong. If you include additional text, audio, or video that comments or expands on the original material, this will enhance your claim of fair use. In addition, if you use the original work in order to create a parody this may qualify as fair use so long as the thrust of the parody is directed toward the original work or its creator.
Moreover, if the original work or your use of it has news value, this can also increase the likelihood that your use is a fair use. Although there is no particular legal doctrine specifying how this is weighed, several court opinions have cited the newsworthiness of the work in question when finding in favor of fair use. See, e.g., Diebold, 337 F. Supp. at 1203 (concluding "[i]t is hard to imagine a subject the discussion of which could be more in the publics interest), Norse v. Henry Holt & Co., 847 F. Supp. 142, 147 (N.D. Cal. 1994) (noting "the public benefits from the additional knowledge that Morgan provides about William Burroughs and other writers of the same era").

2. Nature of the Copyrighted Work
In examining this factor, a court will look to whether the material you have used is factual or creative, and whether it is published or unpublished. Although non-fiction works such as biographies and news articles are protected by copyright law, their factual nature means that one may rely more heavily on these items and still enjoy the protections of fair use. Unlike factual works, fictional works are typically given greater protection in a fair use analysis. So, for example, taking newsworthy quotes from a research report is more likely to be protected by fair use than quoting from a novel. However, this question is not determinative, and courts have found fair use of fictional works in some of the pivotal cases on the subject. See, e.g., Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 456 (1984).
The published or unpublished nature of the original work is only a determining factor in a narrow class of cases. In 1992, Congress amended the Copyright Act to add that fair use may apply to unpublished works. See 17 U.S.C. 107. This distinction remains mostly to protect the secrecy of works that are on their way to publication. Therefore, the nature of the copyrighted work is often a small part of the fair use analysis, which is more often determined by looking at the remaining three factors.


3. Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used
Unfortunately, there is no single guide that definitively states how much of a copyrighted work you can use without copyright liability. Instead, courts look to how such excerpts were used and what their relation was to the whole work. If the excerpt in question diminishes the value of the original or embodies a substantial part of the efforts of the author, even an excerpt may constitute an infringing use.
If you limit your use of copyrighted text, video, or other materials to only the portion that is necessary to accomplish your purpose or convey your message, it will increase the likelihood that a court will find your use is a fair use.
Of course, if you are reviewing a book or movie, you may need to reprint portions of the copyrighted work in the course of reviewing it in order to make you points. Even substantial quotations may qualify as fair use in "a review of a published work or a news account of a speech that had been delivered to the public or disseminated to the press." Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters., 471 U.S. 539, 564 (1985). However, substantial quotations from non-public sources or unpublished works do not enjoy the same protections.

4. The Effect of Your Use Upon the Potential Market for the Copyrighted Work In examining the fourth factor, which courts tend to view as the most important factor, a court will look to see how much the market value of the copyrighted work is affected by the use in question. This factor will weigh in favor of the copyright holder if unrestricted and widespread use similar to the one in question would have a substantially adverse impact on the potential market for the work.

Although the copyright holder need not have established a market for the work beforehand, he or she must demonstrate that the market is "traditional, reasonable, or likely to be developed." Ringgold v. Black Entm't TV, 126 F.3d 70, 81 (2d Cir. 1997). An actual effect on the number of licensing requests need not be shown. The fact that the original work was distributed for free, however, may weigh against a finding that the work had publication value. See Nunez v. Caribbean Int'l News Corp., 235 F.3d 18, 25 (1st Cir. 2000). Likewise, the fact that the source is out of print or no longer sold will also weigh in favor of fair use.
The analysis under this factor will also depend on the nature of the original work; the author of a popular blog or website may argue that there was an established market since some such authors have been given contracts to turn their works into books. Therefore, a finding of fair use may hinge on the nature of the circulated work; simple e-mails such as those in the Diebold case (discussed in detail below) are unlikely to have a market, while blog posts and other creative content have potential to be turned into published books or otherwise sold. In addition, the author of a work not available online, or available only through a paid subscription, may argue that the use in question will hurt the potential market value of that work on the Internet.

Assessing the impact on a copyrighted works market value often overlaps with the third factor because the amount and importance of the portion used will often determine how much value the original loses. For instance, the publication of five lines from a 100 page epic poem will not hurt the market for the original in the same way as the publication of the entirety of a five-line poem.
This fourth factor is concerned only with economic harm caused by substitution for the original, not by criticism. That your use harms the copyright holder through negative publicity or by convincing people of your critical point of view is not part of the analysis. As the Supreme Court has stated:
[W]hen a lethal parody, like a scathing theater review, kills demand for the original, it does not produce a harm cognizable under the Copyright Act. Because "parody may quite legitimately aim at garroting the original, destroying it commercially as well as artistically," the role of the courts is to distinguish between '[b]iting criticism [that merely] suppresses demand [and] copyright infringement[, which] usurps it.'" Campbell, 510 U.S. at 591-92 (citations omitted).
The fact that your use creates or improves the market for the original work will favor a finding for fair use on this factor. See Nunez, 235 F.3d at 25 (finding fair use when the publication of nude photos actually stirred the controversy that created their market value and there was no evidence that the market existed beforehand).

In summary, although courts will balance all four factors when assessing fair use, the fair use defense is most likely to apply when the infringing use involves criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.  In addition, some general rules of thumb can be helpful in analyzing fair use:

A use that transforms the original work in some way is more likely to be a fair use;

A non-profit use is more likely to be considered a fair use than a for-profit use;

A shorter excerpt is more likely to be a fair use than a long one; and

A use that cannot act as a replacement for the original work is more likely to be a fair use than one that can serve as a replacement.

The images show here are copyrighted material owned by Melanie Lowry of Catinallity Cattery.

Buyers Warning About:
Breeder: Melanie Lowry
Cattery: Lollimops Himalayans & Persians Reg. CFA Cattery # 138835 AKA Sugar Kisses/ West Coast Meows/ Precious Kittens
Dis-satisfied Buyer: Kristi Kortmeyer, Phoenix Arizona





  PAST buyer very dis-satisfied sharing about buying from LOLLIMOPS & CATINALLITY Catteries

My Experience
In 2002 and 2003 I received 3 kitties total:
1. One with FIP that died
2. one that tested positive for FeLV,
3. and the third kitten was sick with URI and ringworm
but is currently healthy and happy :)
Hello... I'd love to check out your site. I have had bad experiences with Melanie Lowry and as an inexperienced breeder, I wasn't sure how to handle it or her, so after many emails and phone calls with her, I finally let it go.... Today I thought I'd Google her name to see if I could find anyone who fallen to her as well. Unfortunately, I wasn't at all surprised to find more HORRIFIC stories similar to mine. I'm sure there are more out there...
I have not filed any complaints against her and there really isn't anything I would accept as a compromise from Melanie at this point in time... but I would like to help the INNOCENT by letting them know that they should ABSOLUTELY avoid Melanie like the PLAGUE.
My children had a very difficult time and struggled after I received 2 sick kittens from her, 1 which died from FIP and the other which tested positive for FELV ... thank goodness I knew to isolate from my other cats until tested or it could have been much worse...
It looks as if Melanie is an EVIL EVIL person who cares only about money and nothing about her cats or the people/families that she's affected.
I see that she has moved from the house on the hill- I was only allowed to step foot in her living room, but have a feeling that behind her bedroom door there were far more than the 15 cats she allowed me to see in her living room and caged in her tiny kitchen....I have moved on... but, I would be willing to share my experience on your site. Thank you, Kristi Kortmeyer, Phoenix, Arizona
Melanie Lowry is a storyteller who is desperately trying to salvage her reputation, which has been DEVASTATED by her eagerness to sell unhealthy kittens to innocent people. Melanie's response is a bunch of falsehoods. If all of Melanie's so called "Facts" were true, then I would've been quite a happy customer, right?! In fact, if her "Facts" were true, wouldn't I be supporting her instead of this website? I have nothing to gain by discrediting Melanie. I am embarrassed for her.
She obviously has a problem with reality- she now has 7 separate instances where former customers have been swindled and/or deceived by her. Could it be a coincidence that we have similar complaints? Doubtfull.And I'm quite certain there are many more customer's with unfortunate stories who haven't yet discovered the CACB.INFO website.
In sharing my experience I only hope that:
a). others will come forward and
b). that my story can save at least ONE person from being her next prey.
Following this email I will not respond, refute, or entertain ANY of Melanie's additional STORIES. I've told the truth as it was. Shame on you, Melanie!
There are MANY notable, reputable breeders who truly CARE about the health and future of their cats and Melanie Lowry is not one of them. I wish CBC.INFO the best of luck in your efforts to stop corrupt breeders from taking advantage of the trusting public and from medically neglecting precious kittens! You ladies are brave and I wish you much success!"

Go to Melanie Lowrys Horror a page of complaints and history http://ca-catbreeders.info/chocolatepersians.html

How can this person know so much about about this lady? Classic stalking behavior.

I think she is stalking her and what I see is horrible harassment by this person.

Taking pictures from websites is a punishable offense and  after checking, these are from a copyrighted website.

This person sounds demented, hope no harm comes to Melanie/Annie. I feel for her, I was stalked for many years until they caught the person, who is now behind bars, where this person surely belongs. How you (stalker) get some help for your mental illness, as this looks like it has been going on for many years.

http://www.esia.net/Common_Traits_of_Stalkers dot com htm


 If you read nothing else on this site, please take the time
to read this section.  It is extremely important to be aware of the following traits
of stalkers. These will alert you to the possibility that a potential suitor or even a
friend or acquaintance could become a stalker. Stalkers will not take no for an answer.

They refuse to believe that a victim is not interested in them or
will not rekindle their relationship and often believe that the victim really does love
them, but just doesn't know it and needs to be pushed into realizing it. As long as they
continue pursuing their victim, the stalker can convince themselves they haven't been
completely rejected yet.

Stalkers display an obsessive personality.

They are not just interested in, but totally obsessed with the
person they are pursuing. Their every waking thought centers on the victim, and every plan
the stalker has for the future involves the victim. Ask yourself this. Is the person
totally involved in and completely overwhelmed with pursuing someone who has no and never
will have any interest in him or her?
Along with obsessive thinking, they also display other psychological
or personality problems and disorders. They may suffer from erotomania, paranoia,
schizophrenia, and delusional thinking. According to Professor R. Meloy, "these
stalkers have rigid personalities and maladaptive styles. These disorders in themselves
are very stable and not treatable." There are drugs to treat certain specific mental
disorders, but stalkers, when given the choice, seldom continue with their medication or
treatment.

Stalkers are above average in intelligence and are usually
smarter than the run of the mill person with mental problems.

They will go to great lengths to obtain information about their
victims or to find victims who have secretly moved. They have been known to hack into
computers, tap telephone lines, take jobs at public utilities that allow them access to
the victims or information about the victims, and even to travel thousands of miles and
spend thousands of dollars to gain information about or find their victims. Stalkers many
times use their intelligence to throw others off their trail.

Most stalkers don't have any relationship outside
the one they are trying to re-establish or the one they have imagined exists between them
and their victim. 

Because they are usually loners, stalkers become desperate
to obtain this relationship.

Stalkers don't display the discomfort or anxiety that people
should naturally feel in certain situations.

Normal individuals would be extremely embarrassed to be caught
following other people, going through their trash looking for information about them,
leaving obscene notes, and other inappropriate behavior displayed by stalkers. Stalkers,
however, don't see this as inappropriate behavior, but only as a means to gain the
person's love.

Stalkers often suffer from low self-esteem, and feel they
must have a relationship with the victim in order to have any self worth.

Preoccupations with other people almost always involve someone with
weak social skills and low self-esteem.

Few stalkers can see how their actions
are hurting others.

They display other sociopathic thinking in that they cannot learn
from experience, and they don't believe society's rules apply to them. Most stalkers don't
think they're really threatening, intimidating, or even stalking someone else. They think
they're simply trying to show the victims that they're the right one for
them.  To the victims of stalking it is like a prolonged rape.
Stalkers, like rapists, want absolute control over their victims.
They don't regard what they're doing as a crime, or even wrong. To them it is true
love, with the exception that the victim doesn't recognize it yet. With enough
persistence, stalkers believe they will eventually convince the victims of their love.

Stalkers many times have a mean streak and will become
violent when frustrated.  How violent?  Often deadly.

We've no sympathy for anyone ripped off by animal breeders. Dogs and cats should be adopted from shelters. Most pet purchases from breeders are by selfish people "who want what they want" as though a pet were a toy. I can understand using breeders only for professional purposes, where specialty animals are required, or highly recommended. Meanwhile millions of dogs, cats and other common pets languish and die in shelters because someone wanted a foo foo s**+ s**+ pure breed toy dog or cat.

Deny Yourself
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, "If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me" (Matthew 16:24).

First, deny, renounce, and turn away from
self-confidence
self-sufficiency
self-preservation
self-identity
self-centeredness
self-gratification
self-esteem
selfpreoccupation
self-image
self-indulgence
self-interest
and self-righteousness.

In short, Come To The End of Oneself", die to self (identity, preferences, rights, pride, lust, and haughtiness).

"When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things" (1 Corinthians 13:11).

Defensive People Are Prideful Defensiveness if a sign of pride and immaturity.

One of the dictionary definitions for a barometer is that it is an indicator. So any time we sense defensiveness in ourselves or in others it is a barometer indicating pride or immaturity.

You cannot become defensive if you are going to exhibit humility and Christ-likeness. You cannot become defensive if you are going to be teachable and taught by the Lord. You cannot be defensive if pastors, elders, and other believers are to have their proper place in our spiritual growth. An honest and valid question: Am I a defensive person? If we get defensive when others point something out in our lives, then we are still immature to some extent.

Defensiveness is rooted in pride and prejudice. Not being willing to be corrected is defensiveness rooted in pride.
Defensiveness rears its ugly head when anyone touches a nerve in my soul, possibly exposing that I could be wrong about something.
Defensiveness is that feeling I get when anyone challenges me on something, possibly exposing that I have blind spots that they see that I dont see.
Defensiveness shows itself in touchiness when anyone disagrees with me in any way.

If I am defensive, pride is raising its head in me.

If I am defensive. I still know that I know better than anyone who disagrees with me.
If I am defensive, I still am, to some real degree, unteachable.
If I am defensive, I am revealing an inner attitude that I could not be wrong.
If another Christian or one of my pastors, comes to me to share something they feel is a need in my life, do I respond with defensiveness or do I quietly listen, truly hear what they are saying and make sure I understand it and to thank them for coming, and then examine myself before the Lord to receive what He wants for me?
If I do that, is maturity and Christ-likeness.
How I respond at those times will make all the difference between real growth and change or not?

If I am defensive when another brother or sister in Christ says something I dont agree with, I am showing that I am still trying to live like an island, separating myself from the body, asserting my carnal independence from the body, and thus from the head as well.
Defensiveness is so ingrained in us, its almost like breathing. We exhibit it even when we dont know it. If we get challenged, corrected or rebuked, it is ugly and immaturity in action and pride holding forth its inglorious presence.


When I am defensive, I am far from being like the Lord Jesus right then. May God save me from this wicked and ongoing evil.Jesus was never defensive one time in His life, not even once. and He is calling me to put it off, die to self daily and become defenseless, with all my defense being in Him alone.

Matthew 15:8
This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, & honoureth me with their lips: but their hearts are far from me.

Matthew 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.


Ecclesiastes 12:14
For God shall bring every work into judgement, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whethere it be evil.


Matthew 23:28
Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy & inquity.


Matthew 12:36,37
36. But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
37. For by they words thou shalt be justified, & by they words thou shalt be condemned.


Isaiah 55:11
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
KJV

Melanie Lowry AKA "Annie" Westlake still does not believe she has done anything wrong, will not admit she is sorry, and is still continuing to live and act as a criminal. How sad is that? Melanie Lowry AKA "Annie" Westlake's world only revolves around herself how sad is that? Very sad.

This information is to protect any potential chocolate & lilac pet buyers of persian or himalayan kittens or cats. Not to buy from the commerical backyard cat breeder, you will be very sorry if you do.

This site has done research on this CFA cat breeder for close to 10 years and you can read about how she deals with buyers, to how she cares for her cats and kittens, & how she steals buyers deposits & sells diseased kittens.

Melanie Lowry has to be right in every situtation no matter what. Melanie Lowry has an answer for every bad complaint, on top of having to say the "last word".

Melanie Lowry is a "barbed wire". Melanie Lowry has no love inside of her heart, no understanding, no caring about anyone not even herself. Melanie Lowry's life revolves around "self" and how much money she can make on a kitten sale inorder to pay your rent. That is her exsistance, & it is an exsistance. How sad is this? Very sad.

If God was in your life in your heart, you would have love inside your heart, you would care about others and have understanding. But the truth is all those attributes are missing. My prayer for you today is to allow Jesus to come into your heart and heal you of your sins and make you like Jesus Christ son of the Alighty God..

Truly when you come to the end of "yourself" only then will you know what love and God really is. Your way of existence has not worked for you, why not try Jesus Christ

HELP I want my life back Written by Ms Lowry
To read all about her go to http://ca-catbreeders.info/chocolatepersians.html

Upate: The rest of the cattery images so you can know what her 7 websites look like