Well, here in UK it's common when buying a house from a developer that the house comes with a covenant of some kind that stipulates that you can't make modifications to the front of the house without obtaining permission from the developer first. Yes, even though the house is entirely yours. The given reason being that they don't want you making the house "ugly" and ruining their reputation as a house builder.

That is such bullshit. It is not their house! Does it actually ruin their reputation? Or would it if people knew people could do anything to their own damn house? Still, I find not being able to do such things to my house without their permission silly. What is the most minor modification that is disallowed?

In my experience the point of such covenants is not about the reputation of the builder, it's about preserving the character of the neigbourhood... it can be inconvenient for you, yes, but your house is more valuable if you know your neighbours aren't going to ruin your view by turning the front of their house hideous...

Yeah, I was thinking of this and I thought this was mainly the reason but then they should start being honest about it, IMO. I wonder what modifications this disallows that do not actually do any "reputation ruining".

Well, the same argument applies to software, I already bought a copy videogame, so why should I be prevented from altering in any way I want?

There has been a huge corporate landgrab in software under the guise of cipyright