Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 27th Jun 2017 09:13 UTC
Legal

Cyrus Farivar, for Ars:

An architecture blogger has temporarily disabled her website, McMansionHell.com, after receiving a demand letter from Zillow and posting it on Twitter.

On Monday, Zillow threatened to sue Kate Wagner, saying that that she was violating its terms of use, copyright law, and possibly the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act because she took images from the company's website without permission. However, on each of her posts, she acknowledged that the images came from Zillow and were posted under the fair use doctrine, as she was providing (often humorous) commentary on various architectural styles. Her website was featured on the design podcast 99% Invisible in October 2016.

Confusingly, Zillow does not even own the images in question. Instead, Zillow licenses them from the rights holders. As such, it remains unclear why the company would have standing to bring a lawsuit against Wagner.

Her website is incredibly entertaining, and you'd think such use of photos falls squarely under fair use. It sucks that she had to shutdown her website, and I'm hoping Zillow loses this case hard.

Thread beginning with comment 646006
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
fair use vs plagiarism
by unclefester on Tue 27th Jun 2017 09:29 UTC
unclefester
Member since:
2007-01-13

Using a single source of information just means you are lazy plagiarist. The author could have used copyright-free images or paid for stock photos to make her point.

Reply Score: 2

RE: fair use vs plagiarism
by Megol on Tue 27th Jun 2017 09:45 in reply to "fair use vs plagiarism"
Megol Member since:
2011-04-11

Using a single source of information just means you are lazy plagiarist.


No. It means a single source of information is used.

Edit: in this case there is obviously no plagiarism taking place.


The author could have used copyright-free images or paid for stock photos to make her point.


As soon as something is created it have a copyright attached. Fair use is strongly protected in the US.

Edited 2017-06-27 09:53 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: fair use vs plagiarism
by sj87 on Tue 27th Jun 2017 10:12 in reply to "RE: fair use vs plagiarism"
sj87 Member since:
2007-12-16

Edit: in this case there is obviously no plagiarism taking place.

Obvious not plagiarism as the source was identified, but I wonder if 'fair use' would cover extensive, even professional-level, copying of someone else's work.

It is one thing to create a parody out of one or two or three pieces, but here it seems that the sole purpose of existence for mcmansionhell.com was to copy Zillow's content and re-publish it in a slightly different context for their own profit.

Edited 2017-06-27 10:13 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: fair use vs plagiarism
by CaptainN- on Tue 27th Jun 2017 16:11 in reply to "RE: fair use vs plagiarism"
CaptainN- Member since:
2005-07-07

Blogging is not journalism according to the US's weak positions on media protections - so no, fair use is not strongly protected in the US. Fair use rights apply like most "rights" in the US only to large corporations who have the money to protect themselves in court.

In other worse, protections apply only to those with a lot of capital, or capitalists. That's how capitalism works.

Edited 2017-06-27 16:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4