Question not identified.

1. Whether the Eighth Circuit erred in holding that it was fair for real -estate agents to reverse engineer a buildable floorplan of a house ; place no restrictions on the online marketing and advertising distribution of the floorplan so as to limit its distribution to persons actually interested in purchasing the house ; and left the floorplan online and refused requests to take it down for years after the home was no longer for sale , thereby exposing proprietary home -design plans online to the detriment to the architects’ copyrights and the homeowners’ privacy. 2. Whether the Eighth Circuit erred on the first fair -use factor, the purpose and character of the use, 17 U.S.C. § 107(1), where the Eighth Circuit held that merely putting information online was transformative because it conveyed “information;” when it ignored this Court’s Campbell caveat about marketing and advertising uses; where it discredited the homeowners’ privacy and safety interests at stake when their home is no longer for sale by its owner; and where it refused to consider the failure to give attri bution or credit to the copyright holders . 3. Whether the Eighth Circuit erred on the fourth facto r, the effect upon potential market for or value of the copyrighted work, 17 U.S.C. § 107(4 ). ii PARTIES BELOW The