Costar No Longer Opposes Moving Zillow Copyright Suit to Seattle

Despite initial reluctance, CoStar Group says it is amenable to moving its copyright infringement lawsuit filed against Zillow from the Second District Federal Court in New York to the Ninth District Federal Court in Seattle. In a response filed on Wednesday, CoStar clarified its position on the issue stating, that it changed its mind due to information that came to light in Zillow’s formal motion to transfer the case filed in early November. 

A month prior, Zillow had filed a letter asking Judge Edgardo Ramos, a U.S. District Court judge in the Southern District of New York, if it would be possible to transfer the suit to Seattle, where it claims the suit should have originally been filed. In a response letter also filed in early October, CoStar noted that the images at the center of the lawsuit relate to rental listings in 49 states, but “almost 1 in 10 of the infringements relate to properties within 100 miles of the courthouse.”

CoStar said it filed the case in New York due to this concentration of infringement and because the New York rental market is “central to Zillow’s rental business.” 

Originally filed by CoStar, the lawsuit accuses Zillow of “rampant” copyright infringement of rental listing photos. The complaint claims that Zillow’s unauthorized use of CoStar images amounts to one of the largest real estate image infringement cases in history.

In it’s November motion, Zillow noted that while there are a variety of reasons why it would like to transfer the case, the largest factor is that 10 likely witnesses, which include employees in product, engineering, rentals sales/partnerships, AI/Zestimate, support, takedown processes and finance roles are nearly all located in the Seattle area. 

According to CoStar, it is due to this that it is now amenable to transferring the case. 

While CoStar said it is not opposing the transfer, it said it would like to reserve the right to contest Zillow’s factual and legal assertions in Zillow’s transfer motion as the case continues, regardless of whether or not it is transferred. 

Additionally, CoStar pushed back against Zillow’s insinuation that it is using this legal action as a means of “competitive maneuvering,” calling it an “outlandish” claim. 

CoStar also addressed claims that one court may be more favorable than the other, claiming that due to the verdict in the copyright infringement lawsuit filed by VHT against Zillow in Seattle, in which it had to pay $4 million in damages, that the Ninth District may be more favorable to CoStar than the Second District.

In an emailed statement, CoStar’s general counsel Gene Boxer wrote that the company is “focused on a fast, fair decision.”

“We do not oppose transfer because Zillow has admitted the Western District of Washington is where Zillow designed and operated its scheme,” Boxer added. “Moreover, since CoStar sued, two major class actions addressing core aspects of Zillow’s business—lead diversion and the steering of consumers to high priced mortgages—are now proceeding in the same Seattle courthouse. We look forward to proving our claims under Ninth Circuit law and to holding Zillow to account in its own backyard.”

Zillow has not yet returned HousingWire’s request for comment.