Zillow Drops Complaint Against Blogger After Backlash Over Copyright Claim (geekwire.com) 118
The blog "McMansion Hell" is back up and running days after Zillow threatened the site's creator, Kate Wagner, into taking it down. Zillow's decision to withdraw their complaint came soon after the Electronic Frontier Foundation announced it would defend Wagner pro bono. GeekWire reports: "We have decided not to pursue any legal action against Kate Wagner and McMansion Hell," a statement from the company said Thursday. "We've had a lot of conversations about this, including with attorneys from the EFF, whose advocacy and work we respect. EFF has stated that McMansion Hell won't use photos from Zillow moving forward. It was never our intent for McMansion Hell to shut down, or for this to appear as an attack on Kate's freedom of expression. We acted out of an abundance of caution to protect our partners -- the agents and brokers who entrust us to display photos of their clients' homes."
The Zillow response came in the wake of the week's events and a strongly worded letter to Zillow general counsel Brad Owens on Thursday (PDF here). EFF staff attorney Daniel Nazer said, "Our client has no obligation to, and thus will not, comply with Zillow's demands. Zillow's legal threats are not supported and plainly seek to interfere with protected speech." EFF said McMansion Hell was relaunching and no posts would be deleted, but that "in the interests of compromise, and because Wagner no longer wishes to use Zillow's website, she will no longer source photographs from Zillow for her blog."
The Zillow response came in the wake of the week's events and a strongly worded letter to Zillow general counsel Brad Owens on Thursday (PDF here). EFF staff attorney Daniel Nazer said, "Our client has no obligation to, and thus will not, comply with Zillow's demands. Zillow's legal threats are not supported and plainly seek to interfere with protected speech." EFF said McMansion Hell was relaunching and no posts would be deleted, but that "in the interests of compromise, and because Wagner no longer wishes to use Zillow's website, she will no longer source photographs from Zillow for her blog."
Possible real situation. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Possible real situation. (Score:5, Insightful)
This. So much this.
I was going to post:
Translation:
Oh, we can't beat this guy by pounding him into the ground with legal costs. We'd better withdraw our lawsuit.
The blogger complied with Zillow's demand (Score:1, Informative)
Zillow demanded that the blogger stop cribbing images from Zillow, citing agreements Zillow has with the photographers who own the copyrights. The blogger agreed to do so. Thus the dispute ends.
The headline here is click bait. A perfectly accurate headline would be "blogger agrees to stop unlawfully using copyrighted images without license".
Re:The blogger complied with Zillow's demand (Score:5, Interesting)
"blogger agrees to stop unlawfully using copyrighted images without license"
As Zillow does not own the copyright to the images, it would have no standing to bring a copyright case and it could not itself offer a license.
Re:The blogger complied with Zillow's demand (Score:5, Informative)
As Zillow does not own the copyright to the images, it would have no standing to bring a copyright case and it could not itself offer a license.
Assuming this is true (I haven't read Zillow's TOS, so I'm not sure), Zillow could still bring a claim of tortious interference of business relations or similar claims. Given that the blogger's use of the images is probably fair use, Zillow would likely eventually lose, but it would cost the blogger six or seven figures to get to that result. The world is unfair.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Zillow might not own the copyright of the images, it could still own the right to have full distribution rights on where the images might be shown if they have struck such agreement with the photographer. And as the blogger will not show the images then Zillow seems to have presented such evidence, they could even have a agreement where they are to represent the photographer for copyright issues with third parties and thus be able to claim copyright on the behalf of the photographer.
My understanding of Zillow as explained by my realtor when I was buying a house less than a year ago, is that they pretty much just use the same realty services that realtors use, or at least mine. My realtor would have me look at their website and photos, but I could go to Zillow and see the exact same info. So, it would depend on that service's TOS.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Blogger was not using copyrighted images unlawfully; the use was protected free speech.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The headline here is click bait. A perfectly accurate headline would be "blogger agrees to stop unlawfully using copyrighted images without license".
No, it wouldn't, because what actually happened is that the entire archive of posts she's made using pictures from Zillow will REMAIN ONLINE -- only new posts going forward will source the images from elsewhere. Zillow did not want to allow her to do this.
Re: (Score:3)
It's more likely that Zillow wrote a cease and desist to cover their asses just in case the actual copyright holders tried to put set the lawyers on them.
It sucks, but it's a fact of life that people will sue you if you are not seen to have tried something. Even something mind-blowingly stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
And I'm sure Zillow would be perfectly happy taking down the photos on the listings that the copyright holders have issue with. (It doesn't affect Zillow at all - only the homeowner whose listing is now without photos).
Re: (Score:2)
So they were using their lawyers to threaten the blogger under the assumption that the blogger wouldn't be able to afford to defend themselves (possibly knowing they were legally wrong). Blogger gets free representation - and suddenly the who's right/wrong comes back into the equation and they withdraw (because they are good corporate citizens).
No... they effectively engaged in mediation and settled out of court. McMansion Hell agreed not to use the photos from Zillow going forward. Zillow decided not to pursue damages because it is significantly more difficult to meet the burden of proof that damages occurred and the EFF lawyers would very effectively argue that point vs. someone representing themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm assuming they aren't offering to pay the EFF a large donation to cover their legal bills and some form of compensation to Wagner?
No? In that case, they won.
As I mentioned earlier... (Score:1)
Re: As I mentioned earlier... (Score:1)
She's a socialist Bernie-voting SJW.
Re: (Score:3)
Fuck Zillow (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't give a fuck about their bullshit excuses. Zillow can go fuck itself. I will actively discourage people from using their site.
Re:Fuck Zillow (Score:5, Informative)
I wouldn't use their cite because Red Fin has a way better site. Redfin's price estimates have also been far more accurate in my experience.
Re: (Score:1)
OK dude. Calm down. I will continue not using their site, mainly because not being in the house market or in the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you actually look at it? I had to turn away after spending a couple minutes reading through. Nothing buy hypercritical trash.
This is why you NEVER let the lawyers decide (Score:5, Insightful)
what to do. That C&D had NO value for Zillow. Even if the blogger couldn't get help and just went away, what good would it have done? What value would there be in shutting down McMansion hell? NONE. It's not any kind of threat to Zillow. It doesn't infringe on their business any. It makes people who can't afford million dollar homes laugh at the kinda-silly architecture while wishing we could afford to live in a house that stupid.
And now? Zillow, corporate bully, backs down the moment the other side has a lawyer. Making Zillow look EVEN WORSE because it's clear they knew they had nothing to go on, and if they proceeded, they'd get curb-stomped by the EFF.
stupid, Stupid, STUPID. Zillow just pissed away the good will (or at least inattention) of who knows how many people, because either they don't keep their lawyers on a short enough leash, or some exec takes it personally when they get mocked.
Either way, Zillow - get your shit together!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There is lots of assistance out there to help bloggers in free speech cases. Sites like popehat help organize and find help for bloggers being threatened or sued by big companies to shut them up. No blogger should surrender without seeking help in the blogger community.
Re: (Score:2)
what to do. That C&D had NO value for Zillow. Even if the blogger couldn't get help and just went away, what good would it have done?
Doesn't matter. Copyright Law is Copyright Law and copyright owners have a right to exercise their copy rights. If you don't like it, write your Senator(s) and/or Representative(s) for your state.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And under Copyright law there is a very good chance these would have been considered fair use.
If that's the case McMansion Hell could have made the case that the lawsuit was frivolous and requested attorney fees and possibly damages. I'm not sure why McMansion Hell would agree to settle in that case. I can only assume McMansion Hell and the EFF thought there was merit in Zillow's argument from a Copyright perspective.
Re: (Score:2)
I can only ASS-ume ...
Yes. You have indeed made an ass of yourself.
If that was not your agenda, then you have failed.
Wow, nice Ad Hominem there. That will really boost your credibility. IANAL but I am speaking from experience with the legal system. If you don't like what I said then you are criticizing the legal system not me.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So, she copied the pictures from Zillow. I can't blame them for protecting their IP.
Except it's not "their IP". they just license the pictures from someone else. And even if they DID own the pictures, commentary, criticism, etc., is protected as Fair Use. Zillow is just another corporate bully.
Re: (Score:2)
They steal photos from other web sites. Or the agents signed away rights they didn't have. There are examples all over the web.
Re: (Score:2)
You really need to know the details before pointing fingers.
If MLS granted rights to the photos that they never possessed, then MLS is wrong. Zillow is as much a victim as you, especially if they paid for distribution rights that MLS could not legally provide.
On the other hand, if Zillow is scraping content without securing permission then they are wrong.
And on the other other hand, if your agreement allows MLS to share your photos with their affiliates, then it's your fault for not understanding the ToS/co
Re: (Score:2)
Not only are the estimates crap, but the history of their estimates changes, and is completely inaccurate. They literally do not keep an accurate history of their own estimates, and seemingly randomly modify that history. I've known this for quite a while as I've kept track of their estimate of my own home.
Crowdsource the replacement photos (Score:2)
Simple solution would have been to crowdsourced replacement photos. That way Zillow would have never had a pseudo claim in the first place.
Re: (Score:3)
Simple solution would have been to crowdsourced replacement photos.
Simple? Who is going to spend their day snapshotting houses just so bloggers can write nasty things about them. I'm on the blogger's side in this case, but to think that croudsourcing can solve this is a bit silly.
Re: (Score:2)
Google Street View is even less likely to be protected by copyright, though it's hard to get pictures from the right dates. The photos are automated and there is no human effort in framing the pictures.
Re: (Score:2)
Google Street View is even less likely to be protected by copyright, though it's hard to get pictures from the right dates. The photos are automated and there is no human effort in framing the pictures.
Google Street View images are almost certainly protected by copyright law. There's a huge amount of human effort that goes into framing and aligning images.
Re: (Score:2)
Those are aligned and stitched together automatically from a near-360 camera (no framing). What human effort?
Re: (Score:2)
Those are aligned and stitched together automatically from a near-360 camera (no framing). What human effort?
There's a massive amount of human effort to get those images to be stitched together. But regardless, human effort isn't a requirement for copyright protection.
Re: (Score:2)
"Sweat of the brow" [wikipedia.org] isn't enough to afford something copyright protection in the US. See telephone books. A minimal amount of creative effort is a requirement. Google Street View is automated. The effort to create the stitching software does not count.
Re: (Score:2)
The effort to create the stitching software does not count.
I never said it did. It's not the effort that counts, it's the creativity in the stitching software. Dealing with various lighting artifacts, providing a cohesive and immersive environmental whole takes creativity, it's nothing like creating a listing in a telephone book.
Re: (Score:2)
In the end, that would let you patent the algorithm and copyright the code, not the photos.
Re: (Score:2)
In the end, that would let you patent the algorithm and copyright the code, not the photos.
You could patent the algorithm and copyright the code, but there's a strong argument you could copyright the photos as well.
Re: (Score:2)
US copyright laws don't recognize effort. They recognize creativity. Did Google employees do anything creative in creating Street View?
Re: (Score:2)
US copyright laws don't recognize effort. They recognize creativity. Did Google employees do anything creative in creating Street View?
Yes, there was a ton of creativity. Just because they weren't there to press the shutter button doesn't mean that there wasn't creative process.
Yay! Now: remember to support the EFF. (Score:2)
Donations to the EFF are (U.S.) tax-deductible and, if you work for a big company, probably eligible for donation matching.
Re: (Score:2)
Which probably means you never supported them and just wanted to publicly dump on them more. People almost never go from support to eternal non-support because of one incident that doesn't really concern them.
Re:Back up a sec...Zillow was NOT right. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The irony of them even mentioning copyright in a C&D letter has had my head spinning since the first story on this came out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can assure you ZIllow does not have agreements with more than a handful of them; they scrape data from listing sites, they don't source data from listing services.
I also happen to know a couple of Zillow devs (who have no opinion on the matter discussed in this a
Re: (Score:2)
I'll add to that, most MLS providers are so protective of their data they won't even let you look at their feeds unless you're a licensed agent or brokerage, and Zillow is not.
Most MLS providers provide a public feed to MLS for exposure. Zillow likely pays for a license. Zillow makes money with ads and referrals. The "true" MLS data is still private. But there's little on that that isn't "p
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And, while there may be a single MLS for the entire country (there are a handful, actually), they don't list every MLS-listed property; they list only those listed with them by their member brokers, and it costs a pretty penny to be able to list on most MLS providers.
That's why the people want a Zillow/Trulia. To have a single spot to go to to find all the properties for sale in a specific area. The single national real estate organization can't even provide that list
Re: (Score:2)
they are all theoretically connectable in the back, though they often choose not to be
Yes, that is part of protecting their data like it's gold. BAREIS, if I recall, was the worst of the lot that I dealt with in that regard. If a broker didn't pay their dues for a given month, they expected us to know this and disable their access before they told us. To add to that, every MLS provider presents their data differently; different field names, some have fields that others don't (not just different names, completely different data), different formats for the same data (some use acres for lot siz
Re: (Score:2)
A real estimate is both trivial and impossible. The neighborhood numbers are good, as they are real records from real listings/sales, and consistent across time, for properties compared. But yes, you'll never get a good estimate from data. That's why bids come with inspections and the like. The value is not knowable even for the agents in the area. It's all a guess based on comp
Re: (Score:2)
I just checked the MLS and Zillow for a house (more than one, but they were all the same result), and Zillow uses the same wording as the MLS. Either it came from the MLS, or the person that listed it with MLS, also listed it with Zillow...
... or Zillow scraped it from the site of a Realtor or brokerage who pays for the privilege of displaying the data publicly.
Which is what the Realtors and brokerages I worked with were doing. Paying, I mean.
Re: (Score:2)
Either it came from the MLS, or the person that listed it with MLS, also listed it with Zillow...
... or Zillow scraped it from the site of a Realtor or brokerage who pays for the privilege of displaying the data publicly.
So the realtor pays to list with secret MLS. Then the realtor pays to list it on a public MLS-like service. Then Zillow, without permission, scrapes the public site and sells it? Or the agent pays Zillow to list it?
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen you claim to have a lot of experience in a varied array of fields (much as I do, so I'm not saying it's not possible), but I rarely see you exhibiting the knowledge required to take on an entry-level role in those fields, let alone the knowledge som
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm asking how, and you are more focused on my credentials to ask that question.
Have you stopped to consider that I am calling your credentials into question because you are displaying extreme ignorance of the subject matter? I already answered your question and your understanding of the topic is so poor that you completely missed that answer.
Because I'm a nice guy, I'll explain it the way I used to when I got paid to onboard Realtors for my previous employer:
Realtors and brokers pay for access to MLS data. This access not only grants them the ability to list their properties with
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
So, this woman is a total bitch who takes photos of their homes people list on Zillow and use them to make fun of the home owners because she personally finds large cookie cutter homes tasteless. What business is it of hers to get off on making fun of other people's lifestyles.
I think Zillow should have sued the worthless piece of human refuse so far into poverty she'd never see another dollar. I'm very disappointed that they backed off.
As a long time supporter of the EFF, I won't be donating anything to them for a long while.
... so, are you a realtor, or are you Zillow's in-house counsel, Christopher Poole?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Back up a sec...Zillow was right. (Score:5, Interesting)
So, this woman is a total bitch who takes photos of their homes people list on Zillow and use them to make fun of the home owners because she personally finds large cookie cutter homes tasteless.
Kate Wagner is an architecture graduate student who teaches about good architecture partly by critiquing and parodying bad architecture. (And partly by publishing essays about the history of architecture and design.)
There needs to be a lot more of this in other fields of study. You can't learn about good stuff just by looking at the good stuff. Every programmer knows this: You learn so much about good programming by having to maintain shitty code.
Re: (Score:1)
Did your ugly, shoddily-built yet overpriced house show up on her site and now you're ass blasted about it? Aww, poow widdle baby.
Re: (Score:2)
What business is it of yours what other people do with their websites?