All she has/had to do was take out that statement that 'it's from Zillow' and the problem goes away, Zillow doesnt care where you get pics from as long as they have no liability.
All she has/had to do was take out that statement that 'it's from Zillow' and the problem goes away, Zillow doesnt care where you get pics from as long as they have no liability.
However, to be fair to the lawyer, the copyright claim is secondary. The primary claim in the C&D is a violation of the terms of service.
*In the legal sense, not in the moral sense. Though maybe that too.
You seem to be just guessing about what might be in the contract, but I'll run with it. Unless there's some affirmative duty to police in the contract, why couldn't they just ignore McMansion Hell? Ignoring is not the same as giving license.
Even if there's no affirmative duty to police, if you become aware of something that potentially makes you in breach in a contract, you're supposed to try to stop it. Otherwise if you get sued for breach it looks even worse for you - "they knew about it and were too lazy to do anything to stop it"