Recent issues in home improvement commonly deal with architectural imitation, although not all of these issues are taken to court as formal copyright infringement cases. Betsey Schiffman provides some live examples of architectural imitation in her article in the home improvement section of Forbes magazine.  The first example she discusses is about a $1 million home in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, built by a citizen named Truett Miley.  Miley designed most of the home himself and was convinced that it would be unique, but following his own creation, a house very similar to his arose in his neighbors' plot. Miley owns his own contracting company, and he filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against his neighbors Graham and Sharon Stone, who had built the similar house. One of Miley's major concerns was that the imitation house could affect the value of his own home if he decided to sell it, since it was so similar, and right next door. Although his neighbors' imitation could be interpreted as a form of flattery, Miley pointed out that it would have been much more flattering if the house was in another city or state, since this would be less likely to impact the value of his own home. Miley's attorney, Marc Whitfield, pointed out that it is very difficult to place monetary value on architectural originality. Because most homes have common features such as columns and shutters, it is difficult to prove that a home is "substantially similar" to another one. In a court case, a plaintiff must provide evidence that the features of a building are original and have not been used before, and this is very rare. Schiffman brings up the example of Cinderella's Castle in Disney World, which is said to be inspired by the German castle Neuschwanstein, which was built nearly 100 years before Disney World opened. In this case, it is nearly impossible to tell whether this is an issue of copyright infringement. Schiffman mentions other copyright infringement cases involving architecture, such as a case where Hablinski + Manion Architecture in Los Angeles found a home in Beverly Hills that looked remarkably similar to one they had designed. The firm discovered that the "copycat" house's creator, Mehran Shahverdi, had been an employee with them before, and had taken ideas from their firm and from another that he had been employed with previously. This case has actually not gone to trial yet, but is interesting and relevant because it provides a very current example of architectural copyright and its monetary implications. Schiffman's commentary in this article proves useful for my overall paper because it brings up the issue of monetary consequences following imitation in architecture, rather than just discussing the philosophical reasons for the AWCPA or other copyright infringement issues.