But isn't the EFF supposed to pick the fights based on principals? By agreeing to this compromise they really just gave all the Zillow's of the world more confidence that strong-arm tactics work.

Perhaps it's less "fine, I won't use it anymore if you don't sue" and more "I've decided to stop advertising your service for free on my website regardless of the outcome of this," and Zillow deciding to use the opportunity to gently remove their corporate dick from this particular beehive.

Except Zillow sort of won. So they are the beehive and McMansion is the dick being removed.

Very colorful

It's not the EFF's fight to pick, it's Kate Wagner's (the proprietor of the blog). It's pretty easy to imagine her not wanting to deal with a prolonged fight.

Plus, the EFF has limited resources and litigation would be time consuming. As long as they can fight back against the big companies by writing a letter, they can litigate for clients who face other companies who won't back down so quickly.

By providing the muscle necessary to protect the rights of Kate Wagner, they have won.

Which rights of Kate Wagner did they protect? She could have achieved the same thing by losing in court.

She isn't removing old posts that contain photos sourced from Zillow. If she had lost in court she might have had to do that.

She would have definitely had to do that, and probably she would have had enough monetary damages levied to bankrupt her. It's not reasonable to fault EFF for pursuing her best interests.

> It's not reasonable to fault EFF for pursuing her best interests.

That depends on whether you think the EFF's goal is more to protect the general well-being of Kate Wagner or to protect the idea that you can post pictures on the internet.

It's not reasonable to fault Kate Wagner for pursuing her own best interests, but what do those have to do with the EFF?

The EFF is representing her. They are doing so because they have a more general goal, but they're still legally and ethically bound to respect her interests.

I might suggest that representing her in conflict with their institutional mission is not a good use of the EFF's resources, and replaces a conflict of interest between the EFF and Kate Wagner with a conflict of interest between the EFF and its own supporters.

I suggest you try viewing this more as an activity of fundraising than pushing for their main goals. All non-profits funded by small donations have to do such things, and this had a pretty good side-effect as well.

A zillow competitor should just swoop in and sponsor her.

Other users have made similar points that McMansion Hell was somehow advertising for Zillow by using their pictures, but why would you want to sponsor a blog whose express purpose is to make fun of or criticize listing on your site?

Because they're your listings — not your service. If someone saw McMansion Hell they may be inspired to find shitty listings of their own on Zillow, and maybe they just happen to create an account and consider using it to find non-shitty listings when they're ready to buy a house.

So... no forward guidance about fair use. It's very disappointing, the EFF is supposed to be on the good side of the law, it doesn't to serve popular bloggers! Who wouldn't love to play fly on the wall during negotiations?

Once a lawyer from the EFF takes her on as a client, even pro bono, it is absolutely their responsibility to serve her best interest.

As the letter pointed out, the guidance is well established, there's no need to drag out an innocent into yet another fight.

They all tell you to be bold in claiming fair use, the Chicago Manual gave the same advice 20 years ago, yet McMansion Hell is still down. EFF says one thing, Zillow says the opposite. What guidance are we supposed to believe? Is it like Torvalds when someone asked him if he had been approached by the 3-letter agencies?

The Zillows of this world will always threaten to sue and even actually sue regardless of the established precedents, because they don't need to win in court, they just need the other (weaker) side to lose money and time. There's nothing the EFF can do about that by pursuing this case.

If you dislike this, push for a federal anti-SLAPP law.