5 ms·

The Washington Post ran an article/video combo today[1] about Kate and McMansion Hell, and while Kate herself didn't mention Zillow the article itself did a few

The Washington Post ran an article/video combo today[1] about Kate and McMansion Hell, and while Kate herself didn't mention Zillow the article itself did a few times. I imagine this is what prompted the legal threat. It's an entertaining video if you have five minutes. Also of note: Kate's twitter posts from this morning also indicate she has received threatening emails following the video[2], which is sadly not surprising. 1: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/26/the-ultimate-symbol-of-the-pre-recession-boom-is-back https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/06/26/the-u... 2: https://twitter.com/mcmansionhell/status/879422526698532865 https://twitter.com/mcmansionhell/status/879422526698532865

ihuman 9y ago
To add to your comment, she also posted the letter from Zillow to her twitter https://twitter.com/mcmansionhell/status/879429709251137537 https://twitter.com/mcmansionhell/status/879429709251137537
- hluska 9y ago
  Zillow pulled out the fucking CFAA??? That's just plain dirty.
  - cookiecaper 9y ago
    It's pretty conventional in these types of cases. I've received a similar C&D and read several others and they all invoke the CFAA. It seems boilerplate for C&D related to online activities. The CFAA makes it unlawful to exceed authorized access to any protected computer system (essentially, any computer in the United States). If someone claims that you've violated their ToS, they almost always also claim that by so doing, you've also violated the CFAA, since your access "exceeded authorization" as granted within the ToS, which they'll claim you've agreed to. Now your breach of contract is upgraded to a federal crime. Better hope you don't make the wrong MegaCorp mad. Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.
    - hluska 9y ago
      I should have given a little more context. Take a look at the statement that Zillow gave the Verge: “Zillow has a legal obligation to honor the agreements we make with our listing providers about how photos can be used,” Zillow tells The Verge in a statement. “We are asking this blogger to take down the photos that are protected by copyright rules, but we did not demand she shut down her blog and hope she can find a way to continue her work.” The public face of Zillow says they hope she can find a way to continue her work, yet the corporate counsel pulls out a piece of legislation that could see her spending the rest of her twenties in a jail cell. That's dirty pool... Point in your favour though, the Verge didn't even mention the CFAA in their coverage of this. So, I would agree that it's common, but just because something is common doesn't make it right.
      - cookiecaper 9y ago
        Yeah, I'm not trying to imply that Zillow's conduct is morally justified or correct. However, based on my experience (I'm not a lawyer), it is conventional conduct. It is probably less likely that Zillow is intentionally trying to play hardball, and more likely that they pulled out the "Terms of Use violation" boilerplate and made the necessary adjustments. People are successfully sued under the civil provisions of the CFAA on a regular basis and they rarely have to face the possibility of spending their twenties in a jail cell for conventional scraping or copyright infringement (another thing that has both criminal and civil penalties). weev is an exception presumably because his disclosure contained a bunch of personally identifiable information from Very Important People. Swartz was an exception probably because he was apprehended by police for illegally breaking and entering a network closet at MIT, triggering the prosecutor's question "What crimes did this guy commit to justify his arrest?". The CFAA is terrible law, and I say that on HN so much that it will probably be the next thing dang yells at me for saying too much. Large companies like Zillow abuse the legal system to strongarm small entrepreneurs and publishers, and that's disgusting. The fact that it's possible shows that, in large measure, we've lost the plot. We need serious reform not just for the CFAA, but the legal processes that allow this state of affairs.
    - pyre 9y ago
      The US Justice Dept. tested that theory (violation of ToS is a violation of the CFAA) in court, but it didn't fly. The judge correctly pointed out that this basically gives companies carte blanche to make something a Federal crime via their Terms of Service.
curiousgal 9y ago
I honestly could not finish that video. She is as pretentious as the home owners she criticizes.
- KaiserPro 9y ago
  I don't see any pretence, I really don't.
  - lgas 9y ago
    You don't see any pretentiousness in driving around judging a bunch of people on their houses and just ragging on how terrible they are? Really? You might want to look harder.
    - encoderer 9y ago
      Was she judging the houses or the people?
    - omikun 9y ago
      pre·ten·tious - adjective - attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed. The irony here is that her blog rags on the pretentiousness of houses designed to look like better built/designed houses. McMansions are by definition pretentious.
    - wpietri 9y ago
      What do you believe she's pretending to be?
    - chiph 9y ago
      It'd be pretentious to just arbitrarily say "Those houses are ugly". But she says "Those houses are ugly, and this is why". While I don't agree with her opinion on all the houses she features, but the vast majority -- yeah, they're pretty bad, and for the reasons she states. * Odd proportions and asymmetry. * Strange roof lines (the "nub" - it's like a Mansard that didn't know when to stop). * Bizarre bump-outs, because the exterior was wrapped around an interior designed to have crazily large rooms. * Columns that hold up nothing. * And my personal favorite - shutters that don't have a prayer of covering the window when closed. Except they can't close, because they're glued and/or screwed to the wall and have no hinges.
cookiecaper 9y ago
You're probably right about the WaPo article being the trigger. I received a C&D from a massive company shortly after a mainstream news outlet covered a competitor that was engaging in shady tactics. As the entire sector depended on non-copyrightable factual data that was only available from the large company's site, everyone was shut down by a wave of C&Ds that hit over a span of 3 days. Makes me wonder if PR firms are complicit with large companies looking to shut down small players. They feed a story upstream to someone and then the company can pursue legal action without looking petty or like they're picking on the little guy, providing some defense against the negative PR of "punching down" while still allowing them to accomplish their goal of harassing/silencing defenseless bloggers and entrepreneurs. May also help them if they get to the stage of assessing damages, since they can say "This was not just some obscure thing in the corner that nobody noticed; they got national press exposure."

ihuman 9y ago

To add to your comment, she also posted the letter from Zillow to her twitter https://twitter.com/mcmansionhell/status/879429709251137537 https://twitter.com/mcmansionhell/status/879429709251137537

hluska 9y ago
Zillow pulled out the fucking CFAA??? That's just plain dirty.
- cookiecaper 9y ago
  It's pretty conventional in these types of cases. I've received a similar C&D and read several others and they all invoke the CFAA. It seems boilerplate for C&D related to online activities. The CFAA makes it unlawful to exceed authorized access to any protected computer system (essentially, any computer in the United States). If someone claims that you've violated their ToS, they almost always also claim that by so doing, you've also violated the CFAA, since your access "exceeded authorization" as granted within the ToS, which they'll claim you've agreed to. Now your breach of contract is upgraded to a federal crime. Better hope you don't make the wrong MegaCorp mad. Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer.
  - hluska 9y ago
    I should have given a little more context. Take a look at the statement that Zillow gave the Verge: “Zillow has a legal obligation to honor the agreements we make with our listing providers about how photos can be used,” Zillow tells The Verge in a statement. “We are asking this blogger to take down the photos that are protected by copyright rules, but we did not demand she shut down her blog and hope she can find a way to continue her work.” The public face of Zillow says they hope she can find a way to continue her work, yet the corporate counsel pulls out a piece of legislation that could see her spending the rest of her twenties in a jail cell. That's dirty pool... Point in your favour though, the Verge didn't even mention the CFAA in their coverage of this. So, I would agree that it's common, but just because something is common doesn't make it right.
    - cookiecaper 9y ago
      Yeah, I'm not trying to imply that Zillow's conduct is morally justified or correct. However, based on my experience (I'm not a lawyer), it is conventional conduct. It is probably less likely that Zillow is intentionally trying to play hardball, and more likely that they pulled out the "Terms of Use violation" boilerplate and made the necessary adjustments. People are successfully sued under the civil provisions of the CFAA on a regular basis and they rarely have to face the possibility of spending their twenties in a jail cell for conventional scraping or copyright infringement (another thing that has both criminal and civil penalties). weev is an exception presumably because his disclosure contained a bunch of personally identifiable information from Very Important People. Swartz was an exception probably because he was apprehended by police for illegally breaking and entering a network closet at MIT, triggering the prosecutor's question "What crimes did this guy commit to justify his arrest?". The CFAA is terrible law, and I say that on HN so much that it will probably be the next thing dang yells at me for saying too much. Large companies like Zillow abuse the legal system to strongarm small entrepreneurs and publishers, and that's disgusting. The fact that it's possible shows that, in large measure, we've lost the plot. We need serious reform not just for the CFAA, but the legal processes that allow this state of affairs.
  - pyre 9y ago
    The US Justice Dept. tested that theory (violation of ToS is a violation of the CFAA) in court, but it didn't fly. The judge correctly pointed out that this basically gives companies carte blanche to make something a Federal crime via their Terms of Service.

curiousgal 9y ago

I honestly could not finish that video. She is as pretentious as the home owners she criticizes.

KaiserPro 9y ago
I don't see any pretence, I really don't.
- lgas 9y ago
  You don't see any pretentiousness in driving around judging a bunch of people on their houses and just ragging on how terrible they are? Really? You might want to look harder.
  - encoderer 9y ago
    Was she judging the houses or the people?
  - omikun 9y ago
    pre·ten·tious - adjective - attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed. The irony here is that her blog rags on the pretentiousness of houses designed to look like better built/designed houses. McMansions are by definition pretentious.
  - wpietri 9y ago
    What do you believe she's pretending to be?
  - chiph 9y ago
    It'd be pretentious to just arbitrarily say "Those houses are ugly". But she says "Those houses are ugly, and this is why". While I don't agree with her opinion on all the houses she features, but the vast majority -- yeah, they're pretty bad, and for the reasons she states. * Odd proportions and asymmetry. * Strange roof lines (the "nub" - it's like a Mansard that didn't know when to stop). * Bizarre bump-outs, because the exterior was wrapped around an interior designed to have crazily large rooms. * Columns that hold up nothing. * And my personal favorite - shutters that don't have a prayer of covering the window when closed. Except they can't close, because they're glued and/or screwed to the wall and have no hinges.

cookiecaper 9y ago

You're probably right about the WaPo article being the trigger. I received a C&D from a massive company shortly after a mainstream news outlet covered a competitor that was engaging in shady tactics. As the entire sector depended on non-copyrightable factual data that was only available from the large company's site, everyone was shut down by a wave of C&Ds that hit over a span of 3 days. Makes me wonder if PR firms are complicit with large companies looking to shut down small players. They feed a story upstream to someone and then the company can pursue legal action without looking petty or like they're picking on the little guy, providing some defense against the negative PR of "punching down" while still allowing them to accomplish their goal of harassing/silencing defenseless bloggers and entrepreneurs. May also help them if they get to the stage of assessing damages, since they can say "This was not just some obscure thing in the corner that nobody noticed; they got national press exposure."