Uh, while seniorjudge's advice may scare the property seller into removing the photo of your home, unless the property seller had to trespass onto your land to photograph your house, he has the legal right to use the photo of your house in his ad - as long as he does not say that it is your house that is for sale.
Subdivision developers will often have 3 or 4 styles of homes that they build (model homes) and these homes will be pictured in their ads (even after the models have been sold), to give to buyers of the remaining subdivided plots an idea of what kind of home can be built on the property.
Nothing illegal about it.
To Almost a Lawyer: Exactly. A home cannot be considered one's likeness, so it is not a misappropriation. There is (generally) no legal action available when a photo is taken and published of an inanimate object (if someone is pictured in the photo - or if Lassie is pictured in the photo - then there could be), if the photo pictures something that can be seen by the public from a public vantage point (street, sidewalk). As with all areas of the law, however, there are exceptions - some buildings or artwork on or in front of buildings can have copyright or trademark protection, for instance, so even if photographed from a public vantage point, there can be limits on the uses of the photos that are taken. And there are other exceptions. But, in this case, the photograph of the exterior of the house can be used to advertise vacant land in the subdivision, as long as the photographer who took the photo has agreed to have his photo of the house used.
