Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

mcmansionhell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 388 posts

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#221

Post by pbhjpbhj »

amyjess wrote: post #134
droithomme wrote: post #111

mcmansionhell's use is clearly fair use as it falls under both the criticism and parody exceptions. This might be why the Zillow SLAPP letter mainly focuses on supposed TOS violations. Whether unsigned web site TOS off on a page most visitors never see are enforceable at all is highly questionable.

But you can also make the argument that it's only fair use if you're using the photos to criticize and parody Zillow or the services they provide. She's not criticizing Zillow or its services but rather the subjects of the photographs.

That's an interesting construction of the Fair Use terms that to me, IANAL, seems entirely wrong; but interesting.

Like you could stop someone using your image in a parody because you took the picture of your tie and they instead parodied your suit wearing. Doesn't work, the image stands by itself, the supposed purpose of the image is irrelevant to the copyright ... or am I wrong?

If I take a picture from Zillow's site and use it to teach a class about poor framing (ie photography technique) then the exception for educational use still stands.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#222

Post by pbhjpbhj »

peacetreefrog wrote: post #142

Never heard of McMansion Hell before, but went back and checked it out on Google Cache and it just seems mean spirited. Why should anyone care what sort of house people choose to build, buy or live in? Reminds me of the people that couldn't handle an old lady's earnest Olive Garden review a few years back. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ann-brenoff/olive-garden-revie...

Well they do care. Why do you care that they do?

Answer that question and you've come at least half way - probably much closer - to answering your own one.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#223

Post by HillaryBriss »

rayiner wrote: post #106
uses wrote: post #69

I totally understand the whole "McMansions are bad architecture" thing... However, something about it really bothers me. There was an episode of 99% Invisible where the guest was talking about their McMansions blog and how it makes fun of these Horrid dwellings. The whole thing stank of classist elitism. The Wrong Type of people were getting the chance to design and build large houses, and of course they're applying…

I grew up in Northern Virginia among these McMansions, and frankly I don't buy the elitism angle. These folks have a lot of money (top 5% at least, if not even top 1%) and are among the best educated in the country. And these aren't dwellings driven by the need for functionality. It's not like people here have big families they need to house (empty nesters can afford them more readily than people with families!). The…

yeah. i especially agree with the fact that the people who buy these huge homes don't have big families. their families are the same size as the folks down the street in a house with 1/3 the square footage.

in Los Angeles, city government keeps on approving these extremely large homes without even requiring rooftop solar panels -- houses with not just one but TWO air conditioning condensers -- because ... uh ... wait, why?

because they save energy per capita? no.

because they will house more people than the single family homes they replaced? no.

because large homes are basically high capacity production assets which empower the city to be even more globally competitive (like a state-of-the-art rechargeable-battery factory, a digital movie production facility, a high-tech startup office, etc)? no.

AFAIK, we just have a distorted capital market. Federal government policies support home loans and the ownership society. there's also a local shortage of other viable ways for investors to make a quick $500,000 profit.

also, it's a nice boost to the property tax base.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#224

Post by pbhjpbhj »

uses wrote: post #69

I totally understand the whole "McMansions are bad architecture" thing... However, something about it really bothers me. There was an episode of 99% Invisible where the guest was talking about their McMansions blog and how it makes fun of these Horrid dwellings. The whole thing stank of classist elitism. The Wrong Type of people were getting the chance to design and build large houses, and of course they're applying…

Exactly, there's nothing wrong with Geocities style websites either, just snobbishness. /s

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#225

Post by untog »

curiousgal wrote: post #125
Amorymeltzer wrote: post #58

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 sur…

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

I watched it all the way through. I'm baffled as to why anyone would think she's pretentious (is it because she has a zany hairstyle?)

She's knowledgeable. She knows architecture, and she's communicating her knowledge. I don't think that makes her pretentious. It's just that we don't know as much as she does. Let's face it, a blog critiquing the shitty web design/UI choices clients make would be an absolute hit on HN.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#226

Post by kasey_junk »

lgas wrote: post #203
rayiner wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in Northern Virginia among these McMansions, and frankly I don't buy the elitism angle. These folks have a lot of money (top 5% at least, if not even top 1%) and are among the best educated in the country. And these aren't dwellings driven by the need for functionality. It's not like people here have big families they need to house (empty nesters can afford them more readily than people with families!). The…

> If you can't ridicule them for lacking taste you're basically saying that taste doesn't exist and everything is always subjective. I don't know about the rest, but taste is definitely subjective.

Subjective and arbitrary are not the same in this context. If it was arbitrary then you could randomize the outputs and see no correlation between experts and non-experts on determining what was tasteful and what wasn't. Thats not true of 'taste'. Taste is subjective in that it is highly influenced by society/culture/history but experts agree on what is tasteful and what isn't within those bounds.

Now preference is arbitrary and subjective. If you just like something even if its not tasteful that is fine, even for experts and I don't know that it is problematic in buying a house that isn't tasteful other than it is a signal that experts were skipped in certain design phases of the project.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#227

Post by ryguytilidie »

uses wrote: post #69

I totally understand the whole "McMansions are bad architecture" thing... However, something about it really bothers me. There was an episode of 99% Invisible where the guest was talking about their McMansions blog and how it makes fun of these Horrid dwellings. The whole thing stank of classist elitism. The Wrong Type of people were getting the chance to design and build large houses, and of course they're applying…

Doesn't the whole blog specifically point out examples on each house of why they think it is bad architecture? It's not like she just makes a blanket statement that they're bad with no supporting evidence. Every single post has a ton of valid critiques. I don't really know what there is to get.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#229

Post by chodeLoad »

cr0sh wrote: post #190
Overtonwindow wrote: post #156

So I don't get it. This girl sounds really, really petty, and the 99pi episode is probably their worst. So what if someone wants to build a huge house? How is that harming anyone else? If I were wealthy I would totally build a McMansion because I want it, I like it, and I would love to live in it. Who cares?

I don't have any problem with someone building a huge, and subjectively "ugly" McMansion-style house if they want. What I have a problem with is where they usually locate these houses. In many (not all, not most) cases, the builders locate the house in an area completely unsuited for the property. They'll find some low-cost home in an established neighborhood of 30-40 year-old ranch homes (for instance), then tear th…

We're stuck in this, most weirdest of periods of human civilization, where douchebags roam freely, and have outfitters that are capable of catering to almost any level of taste, and will do exactly that for a buck.

Suburbia seems to grow evermore malignant with each passing decade, and so many assholes are couched in lives of ostentatious comfort without ever having to think deeply about what that means.

There's something about driving an hour to work, being bitched out by middle-management all day, driving an hour home, and having nothing but strip malls, video games, tv and the internet to show for it. A fraction of these people have romantic relationships with a significant other (as parsimonous and avaricious as they), and the rest suffer a solitary existence, but maybe with a circle of familial relations that don't actually help matters.

With that, empathy becomes effaced in the slow acid bath of an eight hour (or longer) work day, and then incinerated by the blow torch of a lifetime wasted on spare time in a place where nothing else can be afforded beyond transportation, processed food, and a boondoggle or two to keep you sane enough that you don't snap and kill any of your peers.

Every now and then one miserable suburbanite proves useful enough to be rewarded with a looser collar and a longer leash. This is where the unapologetic, leering McMansion enters the picture.

Re: Zillow forces McMansion Hell to delete posts

#230

Post by imroot »

ceejayoz wrote: post #77
aezell wrote: post #56

Seems like a subscription to a national MLS service would allow her access to all the same images with none of the copyright claims Zillow wants to make.

I doubt an MLS service would permit a user whose intent is to mock some of the listings. She'd have to become a real estate broker, too.

I think Listhub (which covers 99% of the US) doesn't care as long as your payments clear.
Post reply on HN