But I think it's worth saying that there is no actual controversy here. This is an imagined slight taken to a ridiculous level.
Yes, indeed. There is no controversy. Anyone who knows anything about copyright and creativity knows that you can't copyright an idea, or even a title, least of all a cat. (I can't believe I just said that!)
Although there is no controversy, there is ignorance, and that's what we can work to rectify. This ignorance is not a matter of opinion but of fact, law and life.
We do not own the things we write about. Even if the complainant technically owned the cat, anyone would still be allowed to write about it. We may write about (or paint) any topic or object or person we wish to. It is very often the case that two writers come up with the same idea and even the same names for characters - it happened when author Tim Bowler and I discovered after publication in consecutive months that we had both written a YA novel about a 14-year-old boy called Luke with synesthesia. The stories were, however, and inevitably, completely different, just as Debi Gliori's creative story is different from the book of photos of a cat with the same "name". And let's point out that that name is generic, a name that has stuck to the cats of Tobermory, a name that merely describes where the cat lives and is seen. It doesn't require enormous powers of creativity to think of calling a stray cat who lives in Tobermory the Tobermory Cat!
We own our words and our pictures, not our ideas. Anyone can have an idea - it's turning it into a piece of art that involves talent, skill and hard work.
We need to stand up and explain this to those who need to know, otherwise foolishness like this attack on Debi will keep on happening. This is why I've been tweeting and commenting in the last few days - which is how Old Hack came across the story, I think. *waves at Old Hack*