It’s pathetic and yet, fascinating to watch a dinosaur stuck in a tar pit struggle for life.

I cant believe in this world of instant results based on technology that an antiquated idea like this would even have enough merit to warrant a discussion. Quite possibly the dumbest thing I have heard….ranks up there with a solar powered flashlight.

The 70ks called. They want their MLS rules back…

Sad. Another example of folks leading when they have no clue who their leading. NAR is supposed to support our best interests. MLS boards are supposedly run by Realtors. How do we keep getting shot in the foot by those who are supposed to represent us?

Do any of these people realize that a majority of buyers find their property via IDX or their agent searching the MLS? Stats don’t lie and there’s reason more and more agents are ditching the books and print ads.

BTW< when is the meeting at Mid-Years about this. This sounds like something many of us need to witness.

Welcome to my world in Lynchburg, VA. We have to put our listings in the Roanoke, VA MLS to get them onto REMAX.com because the Lynchburg Association of REaltors will not allow to go on national sites except for Realtor.com of course. The LAR MLS listings do go on individual IDX sites but the rules are very confusing. We may be coming into the 21st Century this summer we’ll see. Yes the clients want their properties everywhere you can get them on the internet

WTF? This is absolutely ludicrous. Am I paying dues to be ushered back in time? NAR, if you see this you need to know that your REALTORS think you have lost your ever-loving mind.

Hi all. I am the broker in the middle of this and wanted to say thanks to Paula for such a great write up and explanation of the events and thanks for all the support.

@Bob – Yes a local agent did raise the issue. My guess is he was mad other sites(Paula’s) were showing up for his own listings and he chose to file a complaint to serve his best interest not his clients.

NAR has supported this ruling! That is the scary thing. My local board threw it on NAR for intrepretation and they indeed said Google is a scraper site and no we must “protect the data” from scaper sites. I think the fear is if it starts with our board, it could easily be implemented as a nationwide policy like Benn said.

@Jim – This is supposed to be addressed next week and we would LOVE for you to speak up.

Mike –

When/where/which committee/who’s the chair?

NAR Mid-Year is a busy time and a chance to meet those who can directly impact our business. if we don’t speak up there, we’re mostly silent.

It’s all good and well to talk about it here, but it’s there that we really have to express ourselves.

Doug – Yes it is until it is taken away. We are trying to find out IF this is a confirmed meeting at the conference. We were told by MIBOR that it is.

John – 🙂 It certainly is!

Mary – I wasn’t aware of the rules which are affecting you. I guess if they quietly change the rules, a few at a time, they assume it will not be noticed. Somehow, I don’t think it is meant to benefit the public.

Jay – Yep – a triple shot of espresso!

Ines – Definitely big paws – everyone has their hand out and their pockets lined with the fruit of our labor. You are wise to not be naive. I personally believe it is a power issue!

Benn — Welcome to the dark side.

Clint – You mean there is no use for a solar powered flashlight:) Someone should tell the good ol boys at MIBOR and NAR.

Elaine – I’m all for free market economy and bet my clients are also.

Todd – Paused to laugh out loud 🙂

D Patrick – We have been asking that for years – the answer is, they have a deal with our board.

Matt – Oh yes, we have leaders and they have decided what is best for them, not the Realtor or the public.

Jim Rake – Not in Indiana – our horses are safely locked in their stalls 🙂

Matt Wilkins – Oh, I think they DO realize it and want to control the data. Like I said, I can see an indexed IDX solution in the future of our Board’s public site.

Jim – Sad indeed! I know at NAR is where the change will be made and Realtors will be heard. We were told by our board this is going to be a discussion at NAR next week. We have not been able to confirm, but will post here if/when we are.

Kathy – It’s hard to keep up when the rules become the flavor of the month.

Todd,

So true……..

What NAR/Google has done is reprehensible. My mind just always looks for the immediate solution to solving the problem.

The level of ignorance at NAR is astounding. The people who make these decisions have no business being in the positions they are in and not having educated themselves on what is going on in the here and now. In the meantime, we still have to run our businesses and represent our clients.

NAR working against us just make it that much more of a challenge. I’ve always been good at puzzles.

Laurie

Laurie & Jay,

yeah, it appears as though the association’s leadership is taking cues from congress on how to deal with “the constituents.”

Laurie – I hear you on looking to solve this puzzle… a real game changer, actually…

Benn — Punt indeed…good grief.

Jay — I dont think I could agree with you more. The fact that NAR supported this decision flies in the face of just about everything they “say” they support with regards to its membership.

This whole thing is retarded. There, I said it.

Mike –

Thanks so much for coming on and commenting. That NAR supports this shows that they clearly lack understanding of this “internet” of which we hear so much.

Re: @tcar – meh. I expected as much. Give him a few more hours. At least he came on and said that they were working on it. My greater concern is that the NAR thought this was a good idea in the first place.

Stupid stuff like this that has the potential to so greatly impact our collective businesses make it harder and harder not to agree 100% with @bawldguy. I mean, seriously.

What I want, as a member of the NAR is this – the minutes of the meeting where they supported this change. @tcar, will you please guide me in the right direction to make that request, as well as confirm that this will be on the agenda for the meeting? Thanks.

Elaine wrote: “It seems that this issue is with IDX systems – which includes ALL broker’s listings – allowing “others” to use the info without having the appropriate approval of the reciprocating brokers…”

At least in Arizona (and I suspect everywhere else) when a broker gives approval to have their listings in the IDX feed, they are also giving their approval for those listings to be displayed on other web sites. That is pretty much the point of IDX — to get listings displayed on other sites.

You can opt out of having listings in the IDX. Why you’d want to, is beyond me. But some still do it.

The agent that complained about his listing appearing on Paula’s site needs to get a grasp of what it means when his broker opts in to the IDX.

Thanks for the post Paula. Although I’m dumbfounded, I can’t say that I’m surprised.

::Wonders if the new, retro printed version of the listings book will be available on the Kindle.::

I think a few things need to be cleared up here. First of all, you can advertise your own listings however you see fit and allow Google to index them or have them scraped all day long. The issue is what you do with other board participant’s listings on your site that you get through your IDX.

The problem is this ruling gives/ will give an unbelievable boost to lead aggregators like Trulia, Zillow, and our good friend Realtor.com. R.com aside, the lead aggregators are not members of NAR or the local boards and are not subject to the rules they are imposing on its members. So while NAR chooses to cuts its members legs out from underneath them with their archaic IDX blue laws, the national lead aggregators are the real beneficiaries here.

@Jay – I think you are wrong here: “when a broker gives approval to have their listings in the IDX feed, they are also giving their approval for those listings to be displayed on other web sites. That is pretty much the point of IDX — to get listings displayed on other sites.” Or at least the semantics of this needs to be cleared up. The IDX approval gives permission to be displayed on other’s sites, but NAR is saying you must not let Google or any other search engine get a hold of that data. So I guess it means you can display the data, but not have it be found so as to be useful to anyone.

Once again, NAR has made a decision that craps on their dues-paying members, their clients and consumers in general. NAR continues to think about their own (aka the big brokers who control NAR) self-interets at the expense of everyone else.

Todd said it well with his comment regarding the conversation he’ll now have with his sellers. NAR should ammend its “Right Tools, Right Now” materials to include the scripted response Realtors should give their seller clients when that conversation comes up. Oh wait…that’s right..there is no good respone except, “The organization I and other Realtors belong to doesn’t care about your best interests Mr Seller”.

This ruling in my opinion is highly problematic. It not only ties ones hands in being able to compete with the agregators sites but also opens the doors to more action by the DOJ. When it comes to the best interests of Realtors we want our fellow agents to be indexed rather than the big boys. This is true for several reasons first of all the whole point of sites like Zillow or Trulia is to shave off a protion of the commission dollars if not replace the broker all together. That in no way can be considered a positive for agents. Next the more times that information is found by a modern search engine the less value it has towards building a sites authority. Those large agregators cannot compete with our ability to add content to our sites that shows us as the authority for our local markets, but if they are the only ones with listings indexed they can trump us with access to unique content. This being the case because if those sites are the only ones with the listing data protrayed in a crawlable manner it becomes unique in the eyes of the search engines. I am really dissappionted by the lack of vision by those who are suppose to be our leaders. It is truly sad!

It’s really hard for me to receive updates on the comments here if you delete the comment I used to subscribe to the comments. Can you leave this one please?

Jay and Mike – you are both saying the same thing 🙂 YET, being key!

Jay, the main point I meant to make is that the listing broker/agent/phone number must be included – at least that’s how our Board works. In the pre-Apr 10 example above, only the broker’s name showed up. There’s no phone number or agent name. I think the IDX is responsible for making sure they adhere to their Board agreements.

By requiring the listing agent/broker/phone, it prevents some “questionable” people from presenting the listing as their own – which we know would happen. Consider what is happening now on Craigslist with people “renting” vacant listings.

On a similar experience, I found an old (3 yrs ago) listing of mine on a scraper site. It so happens that this home is for sale again with a different agent. That puts me in an uncomfortable position since it appears that I’m “advertising” a listing that’s not mine. Since there’s no enforcement for these scraper sites to update, it can become a problem.

I wonder why the boards think it’s a great business model to compete with the members who make it exist. I really believe there needs to be an alternative board created.

Benn – Thank you for your support and the opportunity to post here on AG. I did put a lot of thought into this and when the second sanction was laid down, I felt it was time to give a voice to my fellow REALTORS(r) and the unsuspecting who may not know what is ahead for them.

The only way to stop such ludicrous interpretation is to bring to light what happens behind closed doors, as evidence by the two listing comparisons.

My one little site is a miniscule piece of the whole! The implication this represents for our clients, agents and IDX providers is scary.

This should be interesting to follow.

I just want to clarify for some folks here – the issue is not that users can access data on the sites nor is it with any specific disclaimers etc – everything is compliant – the issue is that because of the way the REW technology works (it allows you to query compliant previews of MLS data into your content pages to improve conversion) the MLS board takes issue with it because now Google sees things like the MLS #, address or whatever is in the preview – for example this page – https://www.reddoorindy.com/avon-real-estate.php is a spiderable (indexable) page of content and it has listings data (previews of listings or search results) on it. That is the main thing they are taking issue with at this point.

Hi everyone,

Here is the response from Cliff Niersbach, NAR’s Vice President of Board Policy & Programs:

The purpose of the NAR IDX policy is to give listing brokers a method to consent to display of their listings by other participants on those participants’ websites. Absent the listing broker’s consent, advertising (whether on websites or otherwise) of her listings by other brokers is prohibited by the REALTORS® Code of Ethics and by the license laws of many states.

When the IDX policy was revised in May 2005, the following provision was added: “Participants must protect IDX information from misappropriation by employing reasonable efforts to monitor and to prevent ‘scraping’ or other unauthorized accessing, reproduction, or use of the MLS database.” For nearly four years no questions were raised about this new requirement.

Recently, though, questions have arisen about the scope of the requirement that IDX site operators protect the listings of other participants displayed on their IDX sites from “scraping”. Specifically. whether the policy distinguishes between “malicious” scraping and what might be considered “good” or “benign” scraping. Also, whether “indexing” is a type of scraping. The Center for REALTOR® Technology (“CRT”) advised that while the intent of “scrapers” may be malicious, and the intent of “indexers” good, the two practices from the Web server’s view appear to be the same. Consequently, NAR staff responded to questioners that the requirement to prevent scraping includes indexing.

Obviously that conclusion hasn’t sat well with some IDX site operators and some IDX vendors. What should be clear is that staff’s interpretation isn’t the last word. Rather, if REALTORS® believe the IDX policy should be changed to permit indexing while continuing to prohibit scraping, or if they believe the policy should be revised in some other way, the appropriate step to bring about clarification or change to propose changes/enhancements to the NAR Multiple Listing Issues and Policies Committee. The IDX policy is currently being looked at with an eye toward incorporating certain aspects of the recently revised VOW policy, and distinguishing between scraping and indexing could be part of the effort.

If you would like to propose a change to the policy, send your suggestion to the MLS Issues & Policies Committee in care of Cliff — cniersbach@realtors.org.

Thanks much,

Hilary Marsh
Managing Director, REALTOR.org

“Obviously that conclusion hasn’t sat well with some IDX site operators and some IDX vendors.”

Nor has it sat well with a certain segment of the NAR membership.

I hope those opposed to this short-sighted lumping of malicious scrapers and internet search engines into the same category will send Mr. Niersbach their thoughts, as he requested.

Well slap my ass and call me Becky. Just signed up with Diverse Solutions, oh … Yesterday(!) and look forward to being stomped on for providing listing feeds in the coming months. I feel like the 16 year old who just walked into a party with the keg, only to find the cops in the living room.

Toga! Toga!

Benn –

I’d encourage you to also send your suggestion directly to Cliff as he requested. I’m not confident he’ll come here to read any suggestions.

I think the 80/20 rule applies here. 80% of you think of IDX as pure advertising… it is specialized advertising in that its authorization comes from local IDX MLS Rs & Rs which are allowed some variance (subject to state law) from the NAR model. The broker is presumed to have opted in unless he/she has specifically opted out of IDX (all or nothing.)

It is supported through the MLS vendor who is paid by the dues of ALL local MLS members whether they have oodles, one, or no listings (100% buyer agency.) The idea is to pull Internet traffic to the IDX member websites to benefit ALL MLS IDX Participants. Everyone has a shot at selling any of the listings (MLS spirit of cooperation.)

Brokers are free to deliver “their” listings to any third party aggregator (3PA), including Realtor.com, the mother of all 3PAs, that will best serve them and their sellers. And, yes, the data will be used by 3PAs to generate leads that often are “sold” back to the brokers. Broker’s choice. But, IDX is a special opportunity to get leads directly to MLS IDX Participants.

The Internet is a universe of its own and IDX should have been the portal opportunity to benefit MLS members exclusively… then we started giving away MLS data and created our own Internet competition. Thus, we pay for leads that would have come directly to IDX websites.

If you are thinking only as a “listing agent”, perhaps IDX should be changed to a charge per listing. Then IDX will be no different than any 3PA… expect most, if not all, of the IDX Participants to opt out of any new “open” IDX as their direct benefit will be greatly diminished as listing agents will insist their full contact information be on each listing.

Sometimes, you don’t know you have a good thing until you wake up and find you have given it away.

The DOJ settlement with NAR will have an effect here, too, as “solds” will soon be available for most IDXs.

The act of trying to prevent data from being “out there” isn’t sustainable and it gets these boards into trouble. The agents who provide the best information get the leads. That’s the way it always has been.

We provide IDX in Charlotte, Dallas, and Northern New England, and we always recommend to our clients to put as much “out there” as possible.

So … why do we pay NAR dues every year? Hm. Just sayin’

If the organization does not support the members then why do the members support the organization?

This is quite as silly as the REALTOR vs Realtor (R) silliness that we usually have to put up with, but it certainly makes me embarrassed to be a member of NAR.

Honestly, if I didn’t have to be a member to join the MLS I probably would leave NAR on the side of the road.

@tcar I’m sorry you have to clean up this mess and that you have to explain over and over what a mess it is.

Rob –

A reasonable question.

My opinion is, if some site (feed, whatever) is scraped, and left intact, then no harm is done. Heck, I could look at is like, “there’s another site out there with my listing on it”. And I like that.

The problem manifests itself in the scraping and alteration of the data.

If your scraper company goes and removes the listing brokers info, or the contact info from the agents site you scraped it from, and replaces it with your own information, then that may be problematic. You’re now representing yourself as the seller. Or, you just basically copied my IDX — that I pay for — to generate your own business. Why should I support your business as well as my own?

Personally, I don’t care what agent brings a buyer to my listing. After all, I’m pretty sure my seller’s main goal is to … brace yourself … get their home sold. That’s why if you want to “scrape” my listing and plaster it all over the web, please knock yourself out.

I also don’t practice dual agency, so I’m not worried about some agent getting the buy side instead of me. But let’s face it, there is a certain percentage of brokers/agents out there who do everything they can to double-side deals. Those types aren’t usually quite so keen on getting their listings exposed to as many as possible.

My understanding of scraping is when somebody copies all or part of my site, or runs it as an rss feed without my permission, and puts it on theirs to promote their own business or advertising sleeze site.

My understanding of IDX feeds is that the companies that we purchase this from are licensed by the individual MLS’s/Boards and have given permission for these feeds to flow onto the engines and to be indexed.

So what the heck is the problem here? Was the offending feed not licensed? If it was, the question is why is NAR interfering with decisions made at the board level?

I’m not liking any of this at all and happen to agree. Perhaps its time to toss the captain overboard.

Lisa…

“They believe that if they can keep control of *the listings* they don’t have to prove their worth otherwise in order to obtain business.”

There may be some that think that, but it is not an “either or” situation. I believe exercising your right to your “exclusive” listings does not diminish the need to prove your professional value. You can and should pursue both.

Oh, look at that! I’m still censored here! How wonderful!

Oh my…Google is NOT a scraper site.

Now if your board doesn’t get that much how in the heck are you going to work on the local level.

And…why would NAR agree with such foolishness.

@tcar – “Which is probably why this rule was crafted (again, by members, other REALTORS) in the first place. If I was an agent, and didn’t like this rule, …”

Who?
Which Committee?
Who is the Chair?
I would really like to see the minutes. Will you please email them to me if posting here (or elsewhere) isn’t kosher?

“I guess I would work to change it.”

How? Seriously, how does a member voice an opinion to the members who crafted this rule? Respectfully, Cliff is just one person (despite the fact that I know him and know him to be remarkable, intelligent, capable … tall, good looking … ) he’s just one person. The members who crafted this need to hear from the members who are affected/offended/disaffected.

So … who and how?

@Tcar- You said, “Who Google searches for ‘2920292 carmel’?”

That’s a pretty weak argument, especially for you.

If no one searches Google based on MLS number and/or city, or address, then why are we even having this discussion? If no one searches on it, then there is no need to regulate it.

I do agree with you, however, in that if someone disagrees with the rule interpretation, something should be done about it. That is why I still advocate fighting it on the local level. As much as I sympathize with Paula, (in fact, I can empathize with her, as we have been the target of bizarre interpretations of MLS rules and the CoE) the only way that this would be resolved is if Paula’s broker chooses to fight it. Capitulation is still capitulation, even if you believe you did nothing wrong.

I don’t know the details, but I’m willing to bet that MIBOR sent one heck of a nastygram to Paula’s broker. Heavy-handedness and legalese tend to be the strategy and tactics of choice for large organizations. I’m pretty sure that Paula’s broker could have appealed the rules violation. To my knowledge, that is possible in every association. Paula’s broker chose not to fight the “800-lb. gorilla.”

If there is a rabid gorilla out there, shoot the thing before it hurts someone, don’t avoid it and hope it goes away.

That’s why I’ll reiterate my initial comment– fight it. Fight it hard. Tell your clients how you feel it handcuffs your ability to market their home. Whatever it takes to get the issue heard openly in front of people who have the ability to change the rule, or at least, its interpretation.

Going through NAR leadership on this one is gonna be tough. First of all, the committees can only make “suggestions” for policies and rules. Let’s say that you convince NAR leadership, there is still the possibility that your local association will ignore it. They have every right to do so.

I say, do what you can, where you can. We all have much more influence with our local associations than we do with national leadership.

On a side-note: the fact that REALTOR.com uses the same data that brokers use, from the same source (the MLS of the local association), but are not required to adhere to the same rules, is UNCONSCIONABLE. It is completely indefensible. The fact that our National Association controls the use of its data by its paying members, but not by a private company, is a disgrace.

Sigh… I am literally sitting in the hospital, admitted for cardiac issues – reading this isn’t helping.

I am going to be uncharacteristically brief:

1. Go Trulia! (just saying…)

2. Agents should be cautious of harvesting sites, but not to the exclusion of marketing to the best of their ability and to promote their client’s best interest.

3. There are issues with harvesting / scraping, such as: Agents putting remarks such as “not a foreclosure or shortsale” and then the algorithm classifies it as a foreclosure or shortsale. This has happened to several local agents on Oodle and others.

4. MLS should be doing everything to help the practitioner and not themselves.

5. To NAR: If you want people like me, to keep trying to promote the Association and involvement, you must stop making such dumb effing rulings. Leave it to the locals to screw up all on their own!

Now, my morphine and nitro is wearing off – I’m going to sleep.

As a Broker/Owner, practicing REALTOR, and Vice President of a local REALTOR Association…

[ASIDE: I am a voluntary member of NAR because I believe change comes from within and not because I am required to be a member to access the local MLS. In fact, in Metro Atlanta our MLS’ are not owned by the local REALTOR Associations)

…this policy needs amending immediately. Jay is right, so is Rob, Matt is spot on as well, and especially Daniel when he says, “On a side-note: the fact that REALTOR.com uses the same data that brokers use, from the same source (the MLS of the local association), but are not required to adhere to the same rules, is UNCONSCIONABLE. It is completely indefensible. The fact that our National Association controls the use of its data by its paying members, but not by a private company, is a disgrace.”

Daniel –

My broker did fight – he did not cave to the first email sent out or the second for that matter. We talked to other brokers who were affected by the rule and no one wanted to go the distance. There were several email exchanges and phone calls, to no avail. They sent the cease and desist and told Mike he could present his case to the local Board in a month. Mike was invited to this months meeting, but unfortunately, did not make it. He will continue to try to pursue his options through the board.

Honestly – I believe it would not have made a difference! They sent the second email stating we could no longer index any MLS data, knowing there was a meeting coming up.

Why is NAR involved? Because that was our boards “way out”. They deferred to NAR and NAR said :

“You are correct that under the IDX policy and rules, Participants have an obligation to protect IDX information from “scraping” which includes “indexing”. I’m told that employment of a robots.txt file can prevent scraping of information Participants are required to protect.”

We will continue to fight!

Matthew – Pease take care! I’m praying for you!

I think that Hillary Marsh hit the nail on the head. The rules were written back in 2005. In the tech world that was the 18th Century. Unless the association we are all required to belong to comes into the 21st Century with technology we will be fighting this until we are all dead.

NAR is meeting in San Diego this year. Perhaps a revolution should be planned to take place during the convention. If enough are willing to do this, they will have to listen. Otherwise, we are SOL.

@Benn,

Let me just relate my own personal experience for a moment. Every week, at least half a dozen local associations email or call me about social media. Every week, I get at least one invitation to go speak somewhere for a local board. Most associations don’t know I exist yet at NAR. Yet working with local associations is a part of my job every day.

Less than 400 staff members serve over 1,000 local boards and over 1,000,000 members.

Earlier today, you noted hadn’t responded after three hours. That’s a common expectation. We don’t have the luxury of waiting to respond to our members. Every policy on technology will be outdated almost the instant it is written. NAR staff works with what the elected committees and leadership has given them today.

First off, let me just say that I was always a fan of Jay Thompson, but now I’m a huge fan. Almost every comment he made I had something to say about, but by the time I got down to this box, I realized I could write for about five hours in agreement with some of the things he had to say. What I really enjoyed, was that he said:

“Obviously that conclusion hasn’t sat well with some IDX site operators and some IDX vendors.”

Nor has it sat well with a certain segment of the NAR membership.

I was afraid I was the only one that caught that. Thanks NAR for completely marginalizing all that you just read on this post. Nice work – it should quell any furor over this and make your membership feel pretty calm.

I’m the new guy around here (and real estate in general), I make no bones about it. Sometimes I don’t understand the ins and outs of topics that some of you have dealt with years. So if I say something completely ludicrous, feel free to call me out on it – I’d love to learn more.

What shocks me the most (and this is a general disgust of mine) is that here the board is going after a dues paying member for opening themselves up to be scraped (I’m not even touching the idea of whether Google is a scraper). Ok, so let’s compare scraping to theft, which I think is a logical comparison for the purposes of my argument.

If I leave my wallet on a table in a restaurant and it gets stolen – who’s the criminal? Me or the thief? Now I realize no one has been arrested and this isn’t criminal in nature, but give it a second to sink in. Who’s the problem here? Paula (her broker and IDX vendor)? Or the scrapers? If we are truly worried about scrapers, let’s take steps to stop them, not stop agents from working hard.

I’m sure the argument then becomes that it’s too hard to stop them or would cost too much. Poor excuses if you ask me. It’s too hard to stop the illegal flow of drugs from Mexico these days, but that doesn’t mean we don’t keep trying (and again there’s arguments about our attempts at that too).

I hate to harp on my experiences within the music industry, but I’ve seen how technology can confuse the hell out of a giant machine that works on “steady as she goes” mentality. I watched as Napster took over the world and worried that my own money was disappearing everyday. The arguments flew in different directions and whether one side was more right than the other didn’t matter one bit. The world changed and the music industry was left holding the bag. They failed to see the change and adapt to it. You can argue for days whether it was theft or not, it didn’t matter – it was too late. Change happens, whether we want it or not. Ignoring it doesn’t not make it go away, laughing at it and saying it won’t affect us won’t make it go away…but what does it matter – I’m preaching to the choir here.

I read this early this morning and reserved my comments until now, now its late and I still have to write my post for AgentGenius, how in the world can I compete with this one?

P.S. Extra credit goes to Jason Sandquist for dropping NOFX into an AgentGenius comment thread.

@matt, “What shocks me the most (and this is a general disgust of mine) is that here the board is going after a dues paying member”

Last one, and I’m out for the night. That board took action because another dues paying member asked them to. As I noted before, not every REALTOR agrees that this data should be open. NAR policy is written by it’s members. If you want to change the policy, get involved.

Last one for this evening myself –

“If you want to change the policy, get involved.”

How? Who should members contact to get involved? For many members, this is the problem – they don’t know where to go or whom to contact.

@tcar – Let me try one more time! The results for the listing you are searching does have results, but it is a listing which was listed before April 10th and had already been indexed. Here’s some results for homes listed after April 10th.

The results ARE astounding. It’s almost like the feed was cut!

3810 Brigade Circle
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS318US319&q=3810+brigade+circle

5803 Coralberry
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS318US319&q=5803+coralberry+carmel&btnG=Search

13187 N Camillo
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS318US319&q=13187+N+Camillo&btnG=Search

10412 Breckenridge
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS318US319&q=10412+Breckenridge

3817 Earhart
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS318US319&q=3817+earhart

I was going to post some of these, but didn’t want the post to be any longer than it already is.

@Todd Carpenter You said “this is a search term that nobody would use” – I am going to have to disagree with you here, – the fact of the matter is, I process literally millions of unique visitors through my servers every month for obscure terms with no traffic and these terms are some of the best converting terms in many cases.

While you are right that most of these terms only get searched 1-2 times per month (if you are lucky) what happens when you rank for tens of thousands of them? Thousands of targetted visitors that’s what happens – and these are real buyer prospects.

Now don’t get me wrong – not everyone with a spiderable IDX gets thousands (or tens of thousands) of unique visitors per month due to the fact that in order to truly make a search engine spiderable IDX (or any site with great content) work in your favor from a search engine perspective you need to bring a lot more to the table – but for those that can pull it off – those that learn their craft (ethical SEO in this case) – why should they be punished (Jay already makes a great point above) simply because they put the time in to learn how to take advantage AND invested significantly in the technology (great IDX products like Paula’s certainly don’t come cheap)

Now here is the most disgusting part about this particular situation – I have it on very good authority that the member that reported Paula’s broker Mike Taylor was another member named Mike Woods. The very same Mike Woods that contacted Real Estate Webmasters with the following inquiry –

“IIwould like a site that automatically displays listings and can be indexed by the search engines: 1. Display listings by Subdivision 2. Display listings by Zip Code separated into price range categories 3. Display listings by City separated into price range categories 4. Display listings by Township separated into price range categories 5. Display listings by Bank Owned 6. Display listings by Pre-Foreclosure 7. Display listings by Probate 8. Display listings by fixer-upper Each page would need to be automatically generated with the correct title tag, H1, tag, meta description, meta-keywords and the keywords bolded within the body copy of the result pages. We also need to use friendly URLs. Let’s talk about price and time. Mike Woods President and Owner Broker msWoods Real Estate, LLC 317-578-3220 msWoods.com” [link redacted per commenter]

This was not some “old school” broker who did not understand the value of the product to listings clients or the value to his competitor – he knew all to well – in fact if you read his request for estimate you will find that he actually knows better than most exactly what a solution like this can do for him – so why did he report our cusotmer? You would have to ask him that, but I have a few ideas

#1 – He found out how much something like that would cost and didn’t want to pay, so instead he figure he would just report the competition

#2 – Perhaps he thought that he could have his competition removed while building his own and seeing as he was the only one smart enough to report, he would have the competitive advantage alone when the dust settled.

I have some more theories (and at this point #1 and #2 are just that theories) but the rest (including the quote request) is factual and verbatim.

So what now? Sure NAR didn’t pass the judgement (MIBOR did) but NAR backed them on their interpretation of the rule which basically gave MIBOR their out – NAR should have stayed neutral, but they didn’t, they got involved and spoke before they practiced responsible due dilligence – I think it more than reasonable to expect NAR retract their support of MIBOR ruling until such time as the rules can be reviewed and adjusted (because technically there is no verbiage in the IDX policies doc that states that search engines are scraper sites) in which case MIBOR would have to reverse their demands due to the fact that they weighted so much of their justification on deferring to NAR.

Boy, where have I been?????

The first thing I would like to see happen is Google Slap Realtor.com and de-index their site for agreeing with MIBOR in their assessment of Google being a scraper site (wishful thinking). That’s just plain incompetence and to think these people are running NAR. I know that’s pretty harsh but come on, Google a scraper site.

This reminds me of what took place with the Sarasota Association of Realtors taking Marc Rasmussen’s site and NAR doing nothing. NAR’s Mission is “to help its members become more profitable and successful.” I might be a little cynical, but I just don’t see NAR holding true to it’s mission statement.

@Todd – I was really hoping to see more from you in support of this issue. You know how important Technology is and by enforcing out dated rules like this, it’s only hurting the progression of our industry on the Internet. NAR should not be my competitor and unfortunately it is and rulings like this will only strengthen Realtor.com and hurt the little guy.

@Morgan – That is pretty compelling information that you provided on the Broker. If I were one of his agents working for him, I would definitely reconsider hanging my license with him after seeing how he responds when he doesn’t get what he wants.

This is just a matter of time before other local associations begin to follow suit especially with NAR supporting the ruling. Hopefully with a strong enough voice, we will be heard and we can get these rulings changed for the betterment of all. Having a listing displayed on thousands of websites and indexed in the search engines should be left up to the homeowner, not NAR or the local associations.

The post from Hilary Marsh of REALTOR.org seems to offer a possible solution to this issue or at least a way to suggest one.

It says:

When the IDX policy was revised in May 2005, the following provision was added: “Participants must protect IDX information from misappropriation by employing reasonable efforts to monitor and to prevent ’scraping’ or other unauthorized accessing, reproduction, or use of the MLS database.”

It also says:

If you would like to propose a change to the policy, send your suggestion to the MLS Issues & Policies Committee in care of Cliff — cniersbach@realtors.org

How about proposing a change in policy and sending it to Cliff Niersbach? What about changing the previous paragraph with something like this:

“Participants must protect IDX information from misappropriation by employing reasonable efforts to monitor and to prevent unauthorized accessing, reproduction, or malicious use of the MLS database. ‘Scraping’ done for the sole purpose of search engine indexing or where the data will be displayed in accordance with the terms of this policy shall be allowed.”

Great point, Tony. Until NAR speaks out on this in a pro-consumer and pro-realtor fashion Google should consider deindexing them for equating through their silence that indexing = scraping. It’s ridiculous and insulting to everybody’s intelligence….

Benn,

The reason that I didn’t mention Zillow in my comment is because it has always been my understanding that Zillow operates with data that it gets directly from brokers, not from MLS’s. This makes it different than REALTOR.com. REALTOR.com is getting the data from the same place as Paula’s broker, the MLS. Therefore, it should be subject to the same rules. Zillow, on the other hand, is getting the data directly from the brokers, so would not be subject to those rules.

Now, if my understanding is incorrect, and Zillow does get its data from MLS’s in certain areas, then Zillow, too, should be subject to the MLS rules regarding usage and display of the data that affect participants.

“2920292 carmel” – would I search for something like that? Why duh! yes!
I would also try to rank for it if I found value with it, MLS Data or no MLS Data.
So just how hard would it be to rank for the term “2920292 carmel”? There are 14 results there this morning, most are in a foreign font and illegible. Perhaps everyone that is in this discussion should post a blog entry on the subject titled “2920292” and then the NAR and MLS could just search for that term to find experts in the field and have a source of those that “get it” to put in an advisory capacity to the NAR and MLS on technology. No technology skills – no technology advice!

Here is my post on the subject – https://www.mygulfcoastbeachteam.com/2920292-carmel/

Again, wow, and to think that I thought all we had to do is sell houses?

I wrote up an offer this morning for $405,000… but maybe I should have been SEO-ing.

It is time to get our priorities in order.
-doug

@Matt

P.S. Extra credit goes to Jason Sandquist for dropping NOFX into an AgentGenius comment thread.

hahaha, I knew somebody would get it!

“Again, ALL of my comments here are my personal opinion despite what Jay says.”

I understand you are giving your personal opinion Todd, I said that in my previous comment.

I also understand that when the NAR Social Media Manager speaks, people listen. And the simple fact of human nature is, when the NAR Social Media Manager says anything, personal opinion or not, it will be construed as the opinion of the NAR itself. That may not be right, we may not like it, but that’s the way it is. I spent years inside corporate America in Human Resources dealing with “but it was just my personal opinion” from management and staff. Believe me, what you say ANYWHERE Todd will be taken by many as coming from the NAR. That fact can’t be ignored. Yes, of course you are allowed to express your personal opinion, just understand that it can, and will, be perceived as your employers position as well. That’s one of the shitty things about working for The Man, which you now do.

So I guess an email to Cliff is our only option to “get involved” as we are so often told to do. That seems odd, as I thought there was a committee or some sort of governing body we could address our concerns to. I don’t know Cliff, but if Jim Duncan says he’s a good man, that’s all I need to know to trust that Cliff will take my email and express my concerns to whoever it is that listens to these things. I wish I could tell them directly, but I guess I’ll use Cliff as the “middle man”.

I never expected you to fight this policy Todd, that’s not your job as I understand it. I am disappointed because in the social media space there is obviously a lot of passion surrounding this policy clarification and your response seems to be simply “I didn’t do it. You guys made the policy, deal with it”. I still like ya, and I certainly respect you. But I’m disappointed in the response to this first big “blow up” in the social media space since you took this role.

Granted the numbers here are small considering the overall membership, but I believe one could successfully argue that these passionate few are the ones that truly understand how ridiculous, and potentially damaging, this whole thing of equating indexing to scraping might become.

What I wonder is why it’s taking so long for some smart tech company to put together a national site to replace all the local MLS systems that agents could use without being members of the NAR. The site could be free, supported by Google ads, with no control by the NAR since the agents would no longer need to be members.

Seems simple, so why isn’t it happening?

Benn – in all fairness to Todd, I first used the term “blow up”.

Todd – What could you have done differently? What Benn said. It’s been repeatedly requested on this thread for someone at NAR to let us know what we can do to “get involved”. Is sending Cliff Niersbach an email really all we can do?

Is there a meeting scheduled at mid-year to discuss this?
What committee handles this policy?
Who is that committee chair?
If I send an email to Cliff, what is done with it? Is it “presented” to someone? If so, who? Can I contact them directly?

Maybe I’m an idiot and I’m the only one who doesn’t know how to “get involved”. As I previously mentioned, it’s hard for me to believe that sending a NAR VP is the only way I can get involved. After all, as you’ve stated a couple of times, the NAR didn’t make the policy, Realtor members did. Why then is my only method of getting involved to email a NAR VP? Why can’t I directly address the members responsible for this flawed and outdated policy?

I suspect I can address them beyond an email to Cliff. I just don’t know how. If you can’t answer the “how questions” can you forward them to someone that can?

I sincerely hope that as the NAR SMM, that you’ve forwarded this post and encouraged the staff within the NAR that might have some concern to read the comments. You may not need to care what we’re thinking here, but someone at NAR should. I don’t know who that person is, but I would think that as the SMM when a discussion of this magnitude that is occurring within the social media space occurs, with it’s obvious emotion and (hopefully) obvious potential ramifications, that it would at least be pointed out to the appropriate people within the organization. Maybe that has happened, maybe not. Only you know and you certainly don’t have to tell me or anyone else every step you take.

Now I’m going to be blunt and honest. You know me, that’s how I roll.

You are well aware that before you were even named to this position, there were questions out there that asked regarding how long it would be before the SMM was “assimilated” by the NAR. Well, some of your personal opinions in this thread — to me — have answered that question. It didn’t take very long.

I hope I’m wrong about that. And maybe that’s just my interpretation and my feelings/emotions getting the best of me, but that’s how I felt when I read many of your responses.

I can’t tell you how to do your job Todd. But this whole thing is of very deep concern to me. It clearly demonstrates how poorly some policies are written and interpreted. The potential ramifications of NARs “clarification” or “support” for MIBORs decision is profound. It seems to have been done in a relative vacuum, and some of us are obviously struggling with how we can get involved.

I just wish someone, anyone, at NAR could answer those questions. If an email to Cliff is really the only action I can take, then please explain it to me like I’m 3 years old — “Yes Jay, all you can do to get involved in this matter is email Cliff”.

Going to the whole email “cliff” thing. Will he actually read it or are we going to get some bull s**t PR written letter back just like I get every time I seem to write my congress representative. For some reason that’s how I think it will all go down.

Putting effort into an email just doesn’t do justice if it goes unread or he happens to hit the delete key.

Hey, wait a minute! I’ve got an idea. Why don’t we just require consumers to be blindfolded while trolling the Internet for real estate listings? It would have about the same effect as this ruling without inconveniencing all the hard-working Realtors in Indianapolis. In fact it would be better than the ruling because then consumers wouldn’t run the risk of landing on an actual scraper site. Moreover, the national sites like Trulia, Zillow, Craigslist, Realtor.com etc wouldn’t have an unfair advantage either.

Sheesh.

I emailed Cliff, cniersbach@realtors.org, and he responded very quickly. If you have not done so, please do so now and let him know how you feel about the issue.

@Braxton Beyer Do you care to post his response? I would be curious to hear what he has to say before contacting him myself.

Follow up to my post…..
Who will be at midyear? please note here or email me Deborah [@] PeninsulaFirst dot com

Tx
Deb
732 530-6350

Perhaps in lieu of (or in addition to) emailing Cliff, a petition could be created and circulated asking for NAR to review the pertinent portions of NAR policy dealing with this issue. A few hundred thousand signatures couldn’t hurt. Just a thought…

I’ve spent the last few hours, (yes, HOURS. I have no life.) reading this post and every comment. I’ve gone to Morgan Carey’s blog and read his exchange with Cliff Niersbach. I’ve read Cliff’s “official” response here, which is pretty much summed up in his response in these comments. Here’s what I know:

My head hurts. Bad. I need medication, or an intervention, before my brain melts into a pool of yucky gray matter and runs all over my laptop. The stupidity of this decision confounds me. The logic escapes me. How can a large, national organization that is supposed to be doing everything it can to make it’s members more successful suddenly doing something that is so Neanderthal in scope and consequence? Why can they not see the harm this will do to the members it so boldly claims to serve, but those members certainly can? Their entire argument is based on the premise that:

“The Center for REALTOR® Technology (”CRT”) advised that while the intent of “scrapers” may be malicious, and the intent of “indexers” good, the two practices from the Web server’s view appear to be the same. Consequently, NAR staff responded to questioners that the requirement to prevent scraping includes indexing.”

From the web server’s view??? Are we now making policy based on what an inanimate object decides is good and bad? Whatever happened to applying good old human reasoning and common sense to a situation to resolve it? Those CRT people should have said, “Well, the web server sees scraping and indexing to be the same, but it’s not capable of making an ethical or moral judgment in this case , but we are. We know that indexing is a good thing, exactly the opposite from scraping, so we, in our infinite wisdom, hereby decree that indexing shall be allowed so our hard-working, innovative members can do their utmost to uphold their fiduciary duties to their clients and expose their listings in as many places as possible. So say we all.”

THAT would have been the logical, smart, HUMAN way to interpret the rule, thereby ensuring that the people they are supposed to be serving and supporting have all the tools at their disposal they need to effectively market and sell their client’s property. But NO, they let a machine do their thinking for them. If the server says scraping and indexing are the same then, by God, they’re the same, and who are we to argue with a Dad-blamed machine?? Ahh, my head…

Well, here are some other things I know (or at least BELIEVE):

1. Left unchallenged, this decision will stand and become a precedent for other MLS’s and Boards to emulate;

2. Debating the point endlessly here and on other forums will not, by itself, reverse the antiquated and narrow-minded thought processes of the NAR (although it does get the word out about the issue);

3. An email to Cliff Niersbach will not, in and of itself, convince NAR to reverse this ridiculous position. It must be supplemented with stronger, more focused action;

4. This decision by the NAR has finally and irrefutably shown that they do NOT have the best interests of their members at heart. They are so wrapped up in politicking, regulating and pompous chest-thumping that they have lost sight of the lofty purpose they so glibly espouse, that of making us more successful. As Jay so eloquently said, “Yeah, whatever”.

5. It’s time that a concerted, grass roots effort to change the direction that the NAR is headed in be formulated and initiated before we as Realtors(r) are regulated out of existence. I know this sounds drastic and perhaps even a little melodramatic, but I for one am not happy with paying dues to an organization that has become so blind to the needs of its constituents. The time to take back “our” organization is now, before the shackles become too tight.

OK, I’m done now. I didn’t realize I was hijacking this thread with this rant, but as others have said, this is an emotionally charged issue that affects the livelihood of every one of us, or will sooner or later. Benn, if you choose to delete this comment, I understand, but the sentiment will remain long after the words are gone. Time for me to write to Cliff Niersbach now.

And my head still hurts…

I’m “in” for the policy-updating effort, too! Now that we’re arming ourselves with appropriate e-mail addresses — for Cliff, local MLS and AoR, etc. — here’s to collaborating at NAR Mid-Year in DC (preferably Wednesday or Thursday 5/13-14/09, since I’m nearby in Northern Virginia) and soon!

@tcar writes – “not every REALTOR agrees that this data should be open. NAR policy is written by it’s members”.

With the technology available today why does NAR still use a committee approach to major policy and procedure guidelines? Why not after committee recommendation an every member vote with majority rule, then at least we would all have an actual voice, instead of being (in my opinion) under-represented.

And before someone preaches at me to “get involved”, I serve as a director at my local association, but feel that we have very limited voices on a national level.

This is what happens when you have a bunch of real estate agents that turned into policy makers on an issue they don’t know enough about. While the rest of the world moves forward in the sharing of information, they are moving backwards. If they would look at how the recording industry failed at keeping music from being shared, they might learn a lesson.

Ummm…why don’t one of you call a lawyer and file suit…that would probably tie things up for a year two

This is a good first step – I’m happy to hear that Paula and Jay have been invited to represent our voices.

I, too, am happy that Jay and Paula will be speaking on our behalf. What concerns me is that this issue will not be the dominant issue being discussed. Makes me wonder what else could be more important at this particular moment in time, and how how much time Jay and Paula will be accorded to voice their concerns. Let’s hope it’s enough…

@The Harriman Team – It has something to do with how short sales are treated. I don’t know any of the details other than that it is an issue with lots of attention right now. I just want to set the proper expectations here. You eat an elephant one bite at a time.

Ack, I stuck an email address in my last comment which sent it to moderation Neverland.

Todd – THANK YOU. It’s greatly appreciated.

All – I’ll do my best to represent everyone’s interest. Feel free to email me at jay AT thompsonsrealty DOT com if there is something specific you’d like me to know and don’t feel comfortable posting it here.

Deb (and others attending Midyear) – I don’t get into DC until late Wednesday afternoon but would love to hook up either Wednesday evening or early Thursday morning (those that have seen me early in the mornings should know I have a strong preference for Wednesday evening….)

I have to say this — given my “somewhat vocal” expression of opinion here and elsewhere, the fact that the NAR is willing to send me to DC to share that opinion directly is a pretty decent thing to do, and I think it signals a very positive step.

Unless of course, the real plan is to meet at the airport and dump my body in the Potomac River. 😉

Jay / Paula – if you guys need any analytics data or information of other kind let me know if I can help – I think you both know my email and you can call me at 250-753-9893 as well.

Jay, that was the exact same response he emailed to me. Word for word. I’m sure he couldn’t craft a personal response to everyone, though. But it was, as you pointed out, received quickly and copied to NAR leadership. Good luck to you and Paula in the District of Corruption!!

Hi,

The MLS policy forum on Thursday morning will have many attendees with a multitude of concerns. In support of grass roots efforts to make a stronger presence and unified message during the forum and committee meeting on Thursday, those interested in a an informal meet up on Wed evening, Lee Ellis will help us organize a time and place. Anyone interested in meeting like-minded people who support “involvement” “good policy making” and “social media” along with a few drinks, laughs and maybe a bite to eat…….please come! Jay indicated a preference for Wed eve…… Surely, we hope Paula will join in…..as in will everyone who has a passion for good MLS policy on IDX. Stay tuned for info from Lee Ellis for details. Anyone with any comments or suggestions?
Deb Madey

Am I over simplifying this by looking at the needs of the actual home sellers?

I honestly believe that the sellers really don’t care how a buyer finds their home on the internet as long as they see the home and have a way to find more information about their home.

The listing agent is always happy to recieve an offer from an interested and qualified buyer regardless of where they saw the home advertised. Print media was for along time the main source of information for buyers and they would scour through the magazines making notes of homes they liked, listed by numerous realtors, and then present that list to their realtor and then ask him/her to find out more about the homes and set up showings if the homes were still available.

The downside with the print media was that as soon as the publication was printed the information was out of date which is why the internet has become so popular for buyers researching information on homes for sale.

I still believe that buyers utilize the internet, browsing from one realtors site to another, much like they did when picking up 4 or 5 of the Homes for Sale magazines and when they have the information they want they still present this to the agent they have chosen to work with.

It would seem that restricting the the IDX sites from displaying the available homes for sale, in terms of the way the search engines pick up the data, would really hurt the actual sellers of the home and the listing agent as now the homes exposure on the internet has been reduced thereby reducing the number of potential homebuyers who can see the home.

Hopefully I haven’t missed the point too much as the whole concept of scraping etc is a bit above me but if I were selling a home I would want it to be seen as much as possible and as long as I was dealing with an offer from a qualified buyer I’d be happy to sell my home to the best offer I got.

Gary 🙂

Go Jay & Paula! Thanks in advance for representing our justifiable outrage and utmost concern about this issue. And please send many Tweets before, during and after the meeting – if possible!!

If you dig this thread, you’re invited! Meet colleagues keen on good policy-making at the “REALTOR Mixer Before the May 14 MLS Forum” at Petits Plats in Woodley Park, DC, Wednesday evening. Check Face book for event details or contact Deb Madey, Deborah [@] PeninsulaFirst dot com, or Lee Ellis, Lee [@] HomeInNOVA dot com, for more info.

I heat @tcar, just saying.

Sorry, but with the comparison to the music industry, this laughable attempt immediately made me think of NAR and this situation.

A good majority of our team’s business revolves around representing sellers. We met with over 150 sellers last year and not one of them asked us:

1. What techniques we would use to hide their property from as many buyers as possible.
2. How we would not cooperate with other brokers so we could keep both sides of the commission for ourselves.

I can assure you that as an agent of the seller, I want the following:

Article 1
When representing a buyer, seller, landlord, tenant, or other client as an
agent, REALTORS® pledge themselves to protect and promote the
interests of their client.
© 2009, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®, All Rights Reserved

And when promoting the interests of my seller, I want their listing on as many websites as possible and in front of as many buyers as possible(as long as the information is accurate).

Do I take issue with a nationwide company displaying inaccurate scraped information……Absolutely

But complaining about an individual/broker displaying accurate information about my listing through a data feed given to them by my own board of realtors…..give me a break.

MIBOR, you should be ashamed of yourselves. Maybe you should be spending more time creating public awareness about why it is such a great time to buy real estate instead of listening to a bunch of cry babies whine about why they can’t compete in this age of technology.

This post is a perfect example of why I read AG and why it is important.

Special thanks to Jay Thompson, Benn Rosales for their insight and the willingness to communicate them.

I have to add that the following brilliant comment from Daniel Rothamel belongs in the history books:

“On a side-note: the fact that REALTOR.com uses the same data that brokers use, from the same source (the MLS of the local association), but are not required to adhere to the same rules, is UNCONSCIONABLE. It is completely indefensible. The fact that our National Association controls the use of its data by its paying members, but not by a private company, is a disgrace.”

And I want to add that I totally appreciate NAR’s response to this thread! 🙂

Reflecting on Brad’s comment –

Now the real work begins. It seems that we have convinced each other and enough NAR staff to have the conversation – In Real Life – with the 112* members of the Committee.

Here’s my suggestion –

If you’re a Realtor, go to this page for the Multiple Listing Issues and Policy Committee.

Find members from your state – EVERYTHING IS ABOUT POLITICS – and contact them. Fast.

Respctfully find out their position and awareness of this policy and educate them. Equally fast. Send them resources to educate themselves. Heck, does anybody want to put together – quickly – a simple fact sheet of talking points that we could send them? I will be contacting the three members from Virginia and encourage others to do the same in your respective states. Personally, I know the three from Virginia and know them to be open minded and informed on current matters … and hope that they will listen and act on Thursday.

If you want an idea of the vastness that is the NAR bureaucracy – check out the Committee page on Realtor.org (which I found after nearly 10 minutes of digging and clicking)

If this is about members helping members, now is the time for us to take our actions from the blogs to the members.

* I may have lost count.

GREAT idea Jim! I looked up GA and I know our 1 committee member and will be glad to reach to him. It would be very beneficial to have a One-Sheet to help us all stay on the same page and deliver a consistent message to committee members. Any takers on assembling that doc?

Here would be my suggested talking points:

1. Recently, a broker in Indiana was forced by their local Association to prevent Google from linking to (indexing) the IDX listings on their site.

2. This means consumers can no longer find the IDX listings through Google.

3. The local Association said Google couldn’t index the site because they believe indexing is the same as “scraping”, which is against their IDX policy.

4. Indexing by Google is NOT scraping. Google links back to the source site and drives consumers back to the site. In contrast, the anti-scraping IDX policy is to prevent someone from stealing the content to present it as their own. These are very different results.

5. The local Association reached their conclusion based on advice from NAR and so NAR’s MLS Policy Committee should clarify this advice immediately for other local Associations facing similar issues.

6. The Committee should clarify that Google is not a scraper.

7. If that clarification cannot be issued immediately, the MLS Policy Committee should state that local Associations are free to interpret the term scraping as they see best and does not, at this time, have a final position on the issue.

Go for the fight! This issue is a huge topic that will affect all of our business! I hope the real reason Paula and Jay are invited to talk is because there is REAl concern for US the REALTOR and not because they recognize there is actual concern and talk ON LINE that will not go away.

I completely believe because of their relationship with MIBOR and lets not forget Realtor.Com fits in there somewhere, they have closed their eyes to who they are representing, US !

This could be a main topic for a long time….. how many consumers will be denied true access?

Perhaps while you are in front of them:
https://activerain.com/blogsview/1065941/homes-on-realtor-com-without-being-on-local-mls-

Where is the policy on this? I would have emailed but don’t have everyone’s email address. So feel free to delete if I am being bad.

Jim, I have been on realtor.org for an hour and can’t find all the state members to call. Very cumbersome.

Well since this is apparently going to get in front of the MLS Committee, I propose that R.com be included in the conversation and taken back for the benefit of all REALTORS.

If the MLS is going to feed that monster, then it should feed all listings with all photos and all virtual tours for all listing agents with links back to the agent and no additional fees for the agent members.

If they want to monetize the thing, let them stick some Google Adwords in the thing and non agent real estate service providers and Trulia and Zillow can pay for their ads to show there!

The monster has to be a huge profit center for somebody, who is it? I feel as if I am a member of a giant co-operative, but I haven’t received my rebate check on those profits yet, have you?

My advice: when in front of the MLS Policy Committee, stick to MLS Policy. The Realtor.com issue is a whole different can of worms and will probably distract everyone from the point you want to accomplish.

You are right Judith, it has just bugged me for a long time that agregators can and will display all you want for free and our own namesake URL charges huge premiums for a lesser product. Should be the other way around.

Judith said

when in front of the MLS Policy Committee, stick to MLS Policy

true, but what should be consulted is what Daniel said about the fact that REALTOR.com uses the same data that brokers use, from the same source (the MLS of the local association), but are not required to adhere to the same rules, is UNCONSCIONABLE <— this needs some massive attention

Who knows… maybe we can kill 10 birds with 1 stone. I agree with Missy in R.org being such a cluster bomb as well.

“If the MLS is going to feed that monster, then it should feed all listings with all photos and all virtual tours for all listing agents with links back to the agent and no additional fees for the agent members. The monster has to be a huge profit center for somebody, who is it? I feel as if I am a member of a giant co-operative, but I haven’t received my rebate check on those profits yet, have you?”

@Cal Carter Well put. VERY well put.

Regarding the Realtor.com/NAR relationship/debacle/fiasco/almostcriminalactivityagainstNARmembers:

I humbly suggest we take this one step at a time. Realtor.com absolutely is a festering sore on the relationship between Realtor members and their/our trade organization, NAR, but let’s fight this IDX/scraping battle first, learn from our experience and contacts and then attack the problem in an organized, cohesive fashion.

We need to present a solution to the NAR such as, “let’s buy Realtor.com – Their stock is two bucks a share and then fold them into the NAR as a not-for-profit entity that benefits all members who are contributing their content and listing data to Realtor.com”

Something like that.

But with the behemoth that is the NAR, I humbly suggest patience, planning and a concerted, directed attack to solve the problem.

I see getting on the agenda as a huge victory for us – the members who feel disconnected from our organization, and see this as a winnable battle.

Honestly, I think that the Realtor.com battle is one for another committee and/or Leadership Team … or we could act locally to pull our respective MLS feeds from Realtor.com and seek to bankrupt them that way. Just a thought.

(and @laniar I think that this may be the foundation for my post next week 🙂 )

I feel like by this time next week I’m going to be a complete failure in a lot of people’s eyes.

I think it’s fabulous that NAR has agreed to send Paula and I to Midyear to discuss the scraping/indexing issue at the MLS committee. And I am more than willing to take the time away from my business and family to do whatever I can there.

But “killing 10 birds with one stone” and fixing the Realtor.com fiasco are WAY beyond the scope of what Paula and I could even remotely hope to accomplish.

I won’t say the MLS committee doesn’t care about Realtor.com, but I don’t believe they have any jurisdiction over it. Even if they do, this particular battle is about the “clarification” that search engines are the equivalent of scrapers.

I don’t really want to stand in front of this committee with a litany of complaints. I think we need laser focused attention on this one specific problem. As Todd said earlier, the way to eat an elephant is one bite at a time.

We have to be realistic here folks. None of this is going to be fixed overnight. It’s entirely possible (probable in fact) that this specific indexing/scraping issue won’t be resolved next week. I can see some “focus group” being formed to examine the issue further. And I’ll happily join such a group.

Those that know me know I’m passionate and I hate to lose. I will take those traits to DC next week and do my best to fix this mess. But please, let’s have reasonable expectations. The fact that NAR is sending two people there on such short notice is remarkable in and of itself. I hope I don’t let anyone down, but I’ll be honest — reading some of these comments makes me feel like I will.

Jim Duncan’s suggestion to contact your state’s committee members is outstanding. Emailing Cliff Niersbach will get your own thoughts into the hands of this committees leadership.

How many reading here have done BOTH of these actions? This is how grass-roots, membership driven change works folks. It’s not me and Paula standing in front of the committee. It is ALL of us letting our state committee members be aware. It is ALL of us sending an email to the NAR VP that asked for emails. (My suggestion – be polite, stay on topic — ONE topic — search engines are not scrapers.)

I’ll do my best next week, but I’ll tell you right now — Realtor.com will not be fixed next Thursday.

I am sure you will do an excellent job as always Jay! Just because someone is given an opportunity to speak doesn’t mean they will be heard, but I do think they are listening. Regardless of outcome, you will not be seen as a failure, but as a well informed and well spoken advocate and spokesperson for REALTORS on the web. I don’t think they could have picked a better person to go on short notice and I am glad that instead of festering even longer within forums, the message will be delivered to the policy makers.

Jay/Paula, Your efforts are appreciated what ever the outcome. I believe you’re right, progress or instant change isn’t likely, you two/we are wrestling with a Goliath sized tar-baby. This whole drama is an exercise in action, reaction, chain reaction…. I’ll sent my email and stay tuned. Speed, persuasion and all the best.

@Jay

Look, you’re right, but you’ll not be a failure if this ruling is at least given serious thought- and with you there, it surely will. Passion… lol anyway

Here’s what’s in your favor- if the committee refuses to really educate themselves on this issue and take into account what the reaction of a small percentage of their membership is already, I assure you, the day that 1.4 million realtors lose their IDX freedom the committee will not have a choice but to get it- pitchforks & torches come to mind…. ponder.

Thanks @mwurzer with flexmls.com for your input, I hope you will forward your thoughts to Cliff in advance of the meeting at the very least

Thanks @jimduncan for your outstanding suggestion, I’ve forwarded the link to this post to several boards I’m close to do just what you recommended.

Thanks @energizerthread 🙂

Since I’m not a REALTOR, and therefore voiceless in this issue, I’ve had great learning from reading this thread.

I did want to make one small suggestion, however, for the One Sheet and for the MLS Forum. I’m sure it would have been done without, but just in case…

Make sure you do not make this a Google vs. scraping, but Search Engines vs. Something Bad. There are other search engines than Google, although it may not feel that way sometimes. And there will be other search engines in the future that will one day take the place of Google, as Google took the place of Yahoo. (Wolfram anyone?)

The larger question then if you guys aren’t going to have this whole discussion again a few years from now about some Expert Systems Search Engine that takes data, mashes it up with local blogposts, local data, financial analytics, then presents the Answer to the user rather than a longass list of URL’s, is to distinguish between whatever is Good Behavior (using the data to send traffic to the agent) vs. Bad Behavior (fraud, theft of IP, etc.).

Also, I find the little sideline about @tcar’s role rather interesting. That will be addressed separately, and elsewhere so as not to derail this thread.

-rsh

Certainly, Realtor.com should NOT be exempt from the rules that any IDX site has to abide by, but what happens when a small broker like myself is advertising their listings to Google and a large competitor with higher placement is advertising the same listing? I own the listing and agreed to let my competitor advertise under their name on their site, not on google or other sites linked to it. Yet this is what’s happening. My listing shows up with their name on it, and leads I would otherwise be able to get are directed to my competitors site. Since not all brokers can afford to put up an IDX site advertising everyone’s listing (PDX RMLS provides no frame or anything else), I’m at a big disadvantage to the big name brokers here.

@Mary, the thing you are forgetting is if you have the listing your job is not to generate leads, its to sell that listing for the client. Dont you think having that listing come up on any realtor website a potential buyer visits is a good thing for your seller. What would your seller think if they read your statement?

I totally agree on leaving the Realtor.com issue OUT of this fight. This should be a single issue and we are there to WIN (not to “be right”).

I will never give up on the Realtor.com issue. Never. But to matter, ABOVE ALL ELSE BE EFFECTIVE.

The mere fact that Jay and Paula are going to NAR is – in itself a victory, even if a small one. And I believe that Todd is owed a big thanks, as well.

If you already know the MLS number, or the address, you are not finding the home online. You found it in real life. I understand the reason’s why it’s worth owning SERP’s for addresses in your market, the issue is important. But my argument was designed to focus attention to that single issue.

Assuming that customers are not going to google/search for any and every piece of information about a particular property is assuming that customers are not doing their due diligence. Why try to limit the amount of information that they can find?

There is a clear difference between scrapers’ intent and indexing sites’ intent.

Hey Jim Duncan,

You just coined a key summary statement, IMO…..

“There is a clear difference between scrapers’ intent and indexing sites’ intent.”

Lots of good points on the thread.

I just picked up a buyer that was searching for Purple Pink Dinosaurs in Las Vegas… 😉

Better enjoy it while I can before somebody makes a claim that it is a deceptive practice… LOL!!

Anyways… I think this whole ruckus is just another example of policy makers not busy enough selling real estate so they become policy makers…

And the technology minded agents too busy actually selling real estate (or dealing with all of the far more important issues taking place)…

It certainly is refreshing though that some savvy agents will have a say in the upcoming meeting and the NAR has reached out for their input.

Also nice to know that the short sale mess is the main topic…. A little bit late but it’s better to be late then never.

Of course… it’s always better to be Proactive then Reactive but that’s for another discussion I suppose.

Dean Ouellette said, “@tcar, scraper sites should be shut down as they are found”

Again, go back to the rule.

Section 15.2.2 – participants must protect IDX information from misappropriation by employing reasonable efforts to monitor and prevent “scraping” or other unauthorized accessing, reproduction, or use of the BLC database

The rule says steps have to be made to PREVENT scraper sites from accessing the data in the first place. All our staff can do is work within the rules.

Todd – I hear exactly what you’re saying, but why would NAR make the ruling while knowing it’s not that easy of a decision? NAR should have let the local association make the decision and not make a call that could set a precedent for associations across the country until NAR had truly vetted this out.

Also, I don’t think we need to solve the technical issues with Policy (in fact, I think that is impossible). Instead, we should have goals the membership hopes to achieve and best practices for achieving them. Writing a policy that dictates how a web server should perform is not where NAR should be concerned. NAR should be concerned with the goals of it members. It’s obvious that a number (at least those here) of the members want ‘indexing’ to be allowed and not ‘scraping’. I think it’s possible to write a policy that allows indexing (or whatever you want to call ‘good’ stuff – and this probably means having an open policy as servers are concerned) and then include provisions to penalize, pull the feed, seek legal damages, etc… for those who practice scraping or intentionally misuse the data.

I think of it like this… it’s illegal to steal another persons car, but the law doesn’t say we have to lock our doors.

Isn’t this sort of like our data policy with MLS’?

I’ll probably get railed on for this, but here goes …

It seems to me that NAR is not calling Google a scraper site but considering what Google does as “scraping.” This may, in fact, be the truth depending on how you define the term. Google does scrape the text from our web sites to index it. Does this make them a “scraper site?” Absolutely not. Are they scraping? Yes. Obviously the intent of Google is not to steal content as the malicious “scraper sites” are BUT Google DOES sell ad space on their search pages just the evil sites do, so just how different are they?

A lot of people here are concerned that if this ruling stands that our individual sites will have to compete with Truilia, Zillow, et al. Well, who’s fault is that? We GIVE them out listing data! They are not IDX sites – they get their listings from US! We have created a monster that many of you are afraid of! R.com isn’t an IDX site either. They’re the same beast as the others except that they get their feed directly from the MLS. Even if you don’t pay for enhanced listings your brokerage name is on the listing and they can find you that way.

If you are concerned about your web site ranking at the top of Google why would you rely on an IDX feed to do that? If you do a single-property site OR write a keyword-rich blog about your listing you’ll get there. Personally, I am of the belief that it is my job as a listing agent to get the property sold for my client. I don’t care if a buyer finds the listing on another site as long as it gets found.

I believe that IDX is a tool to be used by buyers to find a house while they’re on a particular site. I really don’t see the point of having an IDX that gets indexed in the first place. Maybe I’m missing something on that point, but my goal would be for my web site to rank high for the particular set of keywords I am aiming for and not necessarily for a particular property.

Is the concern of the masses here the fact that your listing is found on another agent’s site before yours or that your listing won’t be found at all? Believe me, your listings will be found … So what if a co-op broker brings the buyer? If you are looking for buyers rework your site so it ranks higher in your area – post local info, blog about your listings … Sorry, after reading all the comments here and on other related blogs, I just don’t understand the issue.

NAR and MIBOR isn’t saying IDX is not allowed – they’re saying that the IDX feed should not be plastered all over the internet. The way Google works, it scrapes the text from your site on a listing that may be owned by another broker, links back to your site as if you were the owner of the listing, and the true owner of the listing isn’t revealed until they are on your site. You have effectively drawn in a potential buyer by advertising a listing that is not your own – which is illegal/unethical – and do not disclose the true owner of the listing until the buyer is on your web page with the full IDX info. It may not be your intent to misrepresent but that is what happens.

The more I think about it, the more I’m leaning towards the NAR side here.

A few points stuck with me in reading (ok, I skimmed a few) these last 250 comments.

First, I agree this is an issue of defining Indexing vs. Scraping

Two ways that scraping concerns me:
1. Inability to track back to the original source of information can mean lack of control in how information is indexed ie. misreading entry of “near water access” to mean “Waterfront”, which is something I’ve encountered, and had trouble correcting- would have been much harder if it hadn’t been on a site using a bona fide IDX feed.
2. Scraping sites using our information to create leads and then sell them back to us.

How to get involved? Start local. Sit on a committee. Sacrifice your time for the greater good. Be willing to take the next step in leadership. Go to State and National meetings. If you’re lucky, you’ll find a great mentor with a big brain like I did in Judith Lindenau, who was our Association Exec. when I jumped in.

I’ll be in DC again this year, and at the 9:00 meeting. IMO the Midyear Meetings are the best NAR offering. But I’m also interested in the governance of our association, and I’m one of those sick bastards that enjoys going to Capitol Hill and telling his legislators how what they do impacts our business, our customers. Real work gets done at Midyear by people who are passionate about making NAR work best for us, the people on the front lines.

Want to hear something really smart? NAR does not charge to attend Midyear.

Oh, and I’ve refused to pay for an upgraded profile on REALTOR.com since they switched to their current pricing model. Maybe that goes back to my distaste for paying someone to use my data to drive consumers to their site.

Let me ask this? Is the data not better protected by REALTORS who are ethically obligated to protect that data and where the rules can be enforced?

I am thoroughly amazed by those who seem intent on preferring a 3rd party to have the data over a REALTOR who can provide accurate data to the public. When I submit a listing through my local board, I am obligated by my the COE and Board rules to provide accurate information.

How many listings have you seen on a non realtor site which is no longer
active or have inaccurate detailed onformation? Have you ever had someone call you about a listing they found on a 3rd party site, which was no longer available. Heck, some are so old, they’ve been sold twice since.

How does that possibly help promote and protect the interest of our clients?

Do you know how we lose control of the data? Have you read the terms of service on some of these sites?

Here’s one for you:

you grant [name redacted] an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide license to (1) use, copy, distribute, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, reproduce, edit, modify, and translate your Submission, in connection with the Services or in any other media, and (2) sublicense these rights, to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law.

So tell me which is better – a indexed idx on a REALTORS site or on a site where they basically say – sorry, we can’t be responsible for the data and we have an irrevocable right to said information.

Can you say SCRAPE? Becasue they have NO vested interest in whether our data remains protected.

Please, someone tell me they understand this!!!

Funny, I see now that as I was writing my comment, J. Paul Francis had posted the exact same thing. Sorry for the duplication, but I’ll reiterate again that the proper interpretation here is of the term misappropriation and not scraping.

Michael and J Paul – Thank you both for taking the time to disect both the rule and the term we need to be focusing on; misappropriation.

The beauty of blogging and social media on a post as controversial as this, is the great thoughts of many and possibly, resolution. At the very least, each of us has a better understanding of the issues at hand and the goals we are working toward.

Web caching is the caching of web documents (e.g., HTML pages, images) in order to reduce bandwidth usage, server load, and perceived lag. A web cache stores copies of documents passing through it; subsequent requests may be satisfied from the cache if certain conditions are met.

It is not to be confused with a web archive, a site that keeps old versions of web pages.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_cache

Hank, your analysis is the same one that led to the interpretation by MIBOR, and it points out the flaw in focusing on scraping versus misappropriation. The only reasonable way to prevent scraping is not to post the content to the open web. Interpreting a policy that way would defeat the entire purpose of the policy, which is to allow brokers and agents to display the IDX information on the web.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that what should be asked of the MLS Policy Committee should be as narrow as possible. To that end, I suggest they be asked to issue a statement that:

“The IDX policy requiring Participants to use reasonable efforts to prevent misappropriation does not require Participants to remove any of the IDX information from their web site or to instruct search engines not to index the site.”

Or, as a fall back:

“Interpretation of the requirement in the IDX policy that Participants use reasonable efforts to prevent misappropriation is to be made by the local Association that issued the policy. The NAR Policy Committee will be researching this issue in the coming months to provide guidance on the issue.”

What is unstated in the above is that no guidance is issued at this time. Perhaps that could be stated, but I don’t believe it is necessary.

Michael you have the best grasp here and I’m so glad you are involved in the post.

Here’s the problem though. Our IT department’s ongoing conclusion is unchanged. What the IDX provider is doing to allow Google to index this data. The technical way in witch that data data is presented on the web so that Google can read it and index it, violates the policy because it allows the real bad guys to then come in and easily misappropriate it.

From my conversations with our IT department, I don’t think anyone there is philosophically opposed to seeing listings on Google. (I could be wrong, it’s Friday night). What they are saying is that their isn’t a reasonable way to open the door to Google indexing without opening the door to real scrapers as well.

Point of disclosure, we are moving out of my technical grasp here. I probably can’t clarify this until Monday.

@tcar “What they are saying is that their isn’t a reasonable way to open the door to Google indexing without opening the door to real scrapers as well.
I really am trying to stay”

I am really trying to stay on task here, but have to ask – how is it that they can open the data to Google through R.com?

My guess is the thought of gioving REALTORS access to their data is going to cost someone money.

Please understand that I’m not defending the wording of the current rule, nor the interpretation at question. What I’m trying to do is help focus the discussion on an approach that may get the Committee from Point A to Point B effectively.

The way things stand right now, there’s a rule that says “you have to take reasonable steps to stop the Bad Guys from doing Very Bad Things by preventing scraping,” and there’s an opinion from CRT saying that the computers can’t tell the difference between the Good Guys and the Bad Guys, so you may have to keep everyone out just to be sure. Seems like CRT won’t be changing their opinion, and it is probably reasonable to assume that as a group the MLS Committee is not likely to just discount the CRT. So that leaves a focus on either attacking the interpretation or attacking the rule.

Michael said, “The only reasonable way to prevent scraping is not to post the content to the open web.” Assuming that to be true, the rule as written means you can’t post anything to the open web since there is no reasonable way to prevent against scraping. You can split hairs on interpretation all you want, but if this is the reality of the universe, it will be tough to simply interpret the rule to mean something other than what it says.

That leaves an attack on the rule as the last option. I like Michael’s focus on the term “misappropriation.” Seems to me that a major problem you’re running into with the rule as it stands is that it has very specific wording regarding scraping. Members must “protect IDX information from misappropriation BY EMPLOYING REASONABLE EFFORTS TO MONITOR AND PREVENT ‘SCRAPING’…” So no matter what else you do to protect the data, you ALSO have to monitor and prevent scraping. Rather than try to finesse highly technical descriptions of scraping, or try distinguish between ‘good scraping’ and ‘bad scraping,’ what if you removed the reference to scraping altogether and rewrote that part of the rule to be more reflective of the reality of the Web?

For example, what about “Participants must use reasonable efforts to protect against the misappropriation of IDX information and the unauthorized access, reproduction or use of the MLS database. For the purposes of this rule, search engine indexing is considered to be an authorized use of IDX data.” No more fights over the word ‘scraping,” search engine indexing is allowed, and everyone can sleep at night knowing that Realtors still have to protect against Very Bad Things as best as they can. Just a thought.

Well, this has been a saga… Many well-intended folks who have missed what has been excellent definitions of indexing and scraping. And, they are clearly not identical. So, NAR should revisit and revise its language to allow indexing and prohibit scraping. (If you don’t grasp the difference, kindly read Michael Wurzer’s posts.).

Once that is resolved, the issue of whom has the authority to submit listing data to third party aggregators (3PAs) should be reviewed. IDX is a cooperative (authorized) effort between brokers in a specific MLS. Brokers, with approval of their sellers, can additionally authorize their MLS to provide the broker’s data to 3PAs, including REALTOR.com (a 3PA authorized to use the “Realtor” name.). MLSs should not be directly authorizing data delivery to 3PAs. It is a broker/seller business decision.

3PAs compete with broker/agent web sites for clients/customers surfing the Internet. As an example, if you have a MLS with 2,000 MLS Participants/Subscribers with web sites, it is not likely that an additional 1,000 web sites operated by 3PA’s will “create” more clients/customers. The 3PA’s will simply reduce the number of client/customer visits to Participant/Subscriber web sites. And, having provided the 3PAs with the MLS data necessary to be competitive, brokers can then expect to pay them a fee for any referred clients. Of course, web sites with the best search engine optimization will rank higher.

Unlike other types of media where distribution of advertising in physical locations may catch clients/customers not otherwise reached, the Internet is dimensionless and any IDX web site can produce full search results without the need for clients/customers to go to a 3PA web site.

The statement I made above that “the only scraping that must be prevented is unauthorized misappropriation” should have said: “the only scraping that must be prevented is scraping that is unauthorized and misappropriation.”

Question:

1) Where do the 3rd Party Vendors get their feeds?

2) Where is Louis, David and Rudy?

3) Are they getting them from Realtor.com?

When I was with RE/MAX I got the feed for them from our local MLS, they could not get it being a 3rd party. When Remax closed in A2 in 07, they lost their feed and the data for A2 Listings.

(They just re-opened here so I am sure they will again have it.)

4) If the 3rd party vendors can get the data and display it and beat us in SERP’s, I am confused as to why we the paying, and in my case an active Realtor on my board can’t display the data as I see fit. Doesn’t seem fair that members of NAR can’t display their own data however they want to (like Paula) with MLS numbers.

I don’t particularly care for the data displayed the way the post started but I respect any Realtors right to display and reach the consumer the way that they see fit.

Ok, there are more 3rd party vendors out there I only named the big 3. I’m not saying they shouldn’t have the data, I have my own 3rd party that I use, which is responsible for 44% of my closing in 08.

But, where are they gettting the data?

Perhaps all of them would like to share with us.

And why the silence here on this debate?

Another point –

I’d *LOVE* to see someone from the NAR MLS committee come here to debate/participate/discuss/let us know they’re listening to this matter.

It shouldn’t fall on Todd to make or interpret an argument or policy that 1) he didn’t make and 2) doesn’t affect his business in any way shape or form the way it does ours – “ours” being fellow Realtors on this board and on the Committee.

Missy –

Your third party vendor is a framed IDX solution. Google can not read the data to display the information. Although I use the same IDX as you, it would not bring you business without PPC.

Additionally, I have an IDX on my website, which is embedded (not framed), which allows Google to read the pages. Granted, I could never get the whole thing indexed; we have 28,000 properties available here.

Both companies offer a service to REALTORS(r) and receive their feed from our local board. The 3PA’s (except R.com)do not get their data from an MLS feed, they get it from agents who put their listings on the sites.

Of important note: the companies you and I use have signed a contract with our boards to use the IDX data: 3PA’s have not.

I understand you and other agents may not like the way it is displayed in my first example, but go look at T,Z,H,C and R.com – this is exactly the way theirs is displayed, which gives them the advantage you speak of.

Many agents who do not understand the difference; they “kick and scream” about their listing being displayed on another agents site. In their infinite wisdom, they would rather have their listing displayed on T/Z/H/C, where we actually lose any control of the data. I Pointed this out earlier, but has anyone read the terms of service for some of these 3PA’s; here’s one short exerpt:

you grant [name redacted] an irrevocable, perpetual, worldwide license to (1) use, copy, distribute, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, reproduce, edit, modify, and translate your Submission, in connection with the Services or in any other media, and (2) sublicense these rights, to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law.

Our data is not protected from misuse, scraping, editing, retransmitting or anything else deemed acceptable by the company. So are all agents who advertise their listings ther in violation of the MLS rules and regulations.

Think about it though, someone finds your listing on T, for example and I have a TPro account, with my picture on the side – is that any different than someone finding your listing on my site. Isn’t the goal to get the home sold and provide as much exposure to your clients home as possible?

As a REALTOR, I have a vested interest in ensuring the data is correct and protected. It’s in the interest of all REALTORS that we have the same right to display as the 3PA’s and REALTOR.com do.

In doing so, we can ensure the data is protected in its integrity.

Missy – I hope you do make it – you have been a mentor to me and I would love to meet you!

Yes, yes!! I would love to see that meeting live-streamed for all Realtors to watch (monitor?) who cannot attend. This issue is so critical, I can’t think of anything else that is more important or has the potential to impact my business more than this. 290 responses to date on this post – WOW! That’s a lot considering most Realtors would not have a clue what is being discussed here.

Kudos to Jay & Paula for all they are doing. We are all so very appreciative.

I don’t think it’s quite fair to separate Google from the rest, many search engines index (spider) sites in similar ways, but I guess Google being #1 puts it square in the spotlight.

“Scraping” or “Spidering” or whatever the term is, search engines page through sites using an almost text-based browser. Engines like Google rate certain HTML characteristics and content which (using a KFC-style secret recipe) give sites their placement. It is possible to restrict certain pages – but not all search engines follow these restrictions – if it’s out there, it can potentially be indexed. Added to this is that just because a site isn’t added to Google doesn’t mean it won’t be found (and indexed or scraped) by Google or another engine. Thus is the viral online world we live in. The only way to secure data is by an old-fashioned authentication system whereby you have to know who the person is before they can see the data (in theory, making electronic browsing more difficult). This may be partly what’s going on between the lines.

If NAR decides to stick to and enforce this policy, it’s going to negatively impact agents across the board. People pay for IDX feeds, they’re not getting stuff for free and, as long as the IDX feed is adhering to NAR rules, if it boosts an agent’s Google rating, then it can only (in theory) benefit their clients who are paying for the best marketing they can get. If agent Joe’s MLS listing shows up on agent Mary’s site, Joe will still be compensated…

Not only is the interpretation archaic, it’s ethically questionable and, to my mind, an attempt at control. As Barry says, look what happened to Realtor.com. If agents are going to be corralled into ever-tighter regulations, then any “personality” or “creativity” will go by the wayside and they might as well look for a “desk job”. Add in all the companies that provide supporting services and you’ve got a pretty big issue on your hands.

I’m sure the original thought behind this “scraping” interpretation was somewhat noble, to revent data theft and resale, but the cure in this case might be worse than the disease.

My prediction, for what it’s worth: If this ruling does start being enforced across the baord, it won’t stop with IDX. The next thing will be listing-specific websites (of which I do several) because it will be deemed “unfair”. Then they’ll add any form of e-flyer, Craigslist or other advertising medium, emailing, twitter, blogging and so on, until everyone is forced to go through “approved” and mandated systems.

Eventually, enough agents will drop out of the system and a new, less restrictive body will form.

Apologies for the novella. I’m not even an agent and it infuriates me that these enforcing bodies go after the benign when they should be focusing on bigger fish.

Great post!
Dave

Personally, I don’t care who or what indexes my listings. I list a home for one express purpose — to sell it. The more sites it’s exposed on, the better. You want to advertise my listing on the web, in the Sunday paper, on a billboard? Please, knock yourself out. The more my listing is out there, the better chance it has of being sold.

If I EVER go to one of my sellers and say “I’m only going to put your listing on my site. That way I get all the calls and can either 1) double-side the transaction; or 2) generate leads from your home, then please take my license.

Jay – I couldn’t agree more. I want my listings to be found by everyone. I’m not worried about where they find them or who put them there. I want to serve my clients and sell their home. That’s what I’m paid to do. Dual-agency or not, there is no reason (in my opinion) to not want every agent and home buyer to see your listing everywhere they can.

I think of it like this… it’s illegal to steal another persons car, but the law doesn’t say we have to lock our doors.

Isn’t this sort of like our data policy with MLS’?

Brad – I made a similar point earlier. Why are we responsible for “theft” by others? I know that the argument is that “it’s the policy” – so I question that policy. Regulated and giving us rules that deter our abilities to sell homes is not the answer. Giving us the tools and “having our backs” should be. PS I hear Jason wears his Birkenstocks to work.

You’re absolutely right. someone alluded to books earlier so take this example. What if you owned a book store. You wouldn’t know whether every person that walked through the door was there to do business with you or steal your books. But you still let them all in. If someone steals, you do your best to catch and punish them. But if you follow NAR’s rationale, you would just have to close the shop altogether. Since you can’t tell who is criminal and who isn’t, you just shut them all out.

Braxton – Much like Brad’s point, I think you’re on the same track as I am.

I know these are not the talking points for Paula and Jay, but I do see the need to point them out anyway.

Jay said he’s worried to leave us disappointed, but I know for me, I won’t be. Why? Because Jay and Paula took the opportunity presented to them and are going to do their best. If NAR chooses not to listen, Jay and Paula have not failed. NAR has. Oh wait, no… the members failed, since we wrote the rules. Sorry, I’m tired of that argument. Turning it around and putting the blame on us isn’t going to help any. Let’s work to change the rules (or the interpretation) written by people who didn’t see the future four years ago.

I wasn’t here in 2005 to even think about joining a committee. I’m ok with the idea that I have to deal with the issues of those that came before me, so I’m not whining about it. And I do plan on working to effect change in the industry, but I’m a long way off from joining a NAR committee. NAR committees require some level of qualification and experience (would you really want a guy with a year under his belt guiding your business, when so many of you are much more qualified?). For instance, the MLS Committee requires 1 – 3 years experience on the Multiple Listing Policy Committee at the local or state level/1 – 2 years experience on NAR’s Multiple Listing Policy Forum (from NAR’s website). Since I have neither, I wouldn’t even begin to suggest that I could serve on this committee. It also takes a certain level of financial commitment which I am not ready to make – yet.

Jay and Paula – Just do what you do. Be honest, outspoken, and focused. I am proud to have you two representing us and I am glad that there are those out there willing to shoulder the burden of something like this for the good of the rest of us. I hope someday to repay you in kind. I appreciate your willingness to drop what you’re doing and be, to borrow a (probably trademarked) phrase from NAR, “The Voice Of Real Estate.”

This is a great test for the real power of social media and no matter what the outcome, I think something bigger than this rule is going on here (not to downplay the importance of that whatsoever) and I hope this is not the last time I see this sort of outpouring of concern. I think the importance of Todd’s position is truly shown here. Although we all may not agree with him throughout this thread of comments, the importance of what is taking place by having him exist is undeniable. Before his position was created, do you think we would have seen a direct effect of this post as we are seeing now? I don’t. I don’t envy Todd either, for as I mentioned in my AG post, I think Todd will always take the brunt of harsh reactions from those of us that are connected to the online world. It’s not fair, but I think it will come with the job. That doesn’t mean we should use him as an outlet for our anger, but I do think it will occur naturally, especially since he will more than likely always be “first on the scene.”

That’s it. I just moved across state and am in search of a progressive broker to hang my license with. What you’ve pointed out here in this post leaves me more convinced than ever that I have no business being a “Realtor.”

Finding a broker should be easy now. If you’re a central pa broker and not a member of NAR, give me a call!

(Awesome comment count btw!)

How would consumers be harmed because IDX listings wouldn’t be indexed in Google? The IDX listings are still available on the agent’s websites.

And I am sorry, but please note the “channels” in the URL’s of the Listhub indexed pages from MIBOR – “Zillow, Secondspace, Foreclosureclicked, etc.”

This is totally crazy. I suggest that all of the web savvy forward thinking Realtors do what they can to get on their local MLS board or committees so that when things like this come up someone with a brain can actually vote on the decision.

Can R.com prevent scraping of the MIBOR listings data? Can you say misappropriation?

https://www.bloodhoundrealty.com/BloodhoundBlog/?p=8352

https://www.retechulous.com/category/nar-blows/

Confused Consumer,

In answer to your question about how consumers benefit from search engine indexing….

IDX rules state that Realtors are limited in what data may be displayed. This discussion does not challenge what data can be displayed. This discussion challenges “how” it is displayed. Indexed data delivers better results for both the seller and the buyer. “How” it is displayed can alter the frequency and accuracy of the property information presented to buyers.

A database search on an IDX site requires the person searching enter the exact criteria to cause a “hit” or “return” of the listing within the database. Google (and other search engines) are able to produce results based upon whatever criteria is entered into the search box on the browser. A quick look at Google Analytics shows how many times keyword terms are searched. Buyers use Google (and other search engines) to find properties, and they do it a lot. As a real estate broker, I can tell you that buyers often overlook properties that do match their criteria when using an IDX database, simply because the entered search terms did not exactly match the IDX search fields.

Buyers benefit from indexed properties because they find properties that match their criteria easier and faster….and they use Google. Many buyers prefer to begin their searches without Realtors, and just gather information on their own. And, these buyers want valid , accurate info with no strings. Indexed data delivers better search results under these terms.

Listing agents are charged with the responsibility of getting the product in front of the buyer. Sellers are entitled to benefit from the marketing expertise of the Realtor they hire to represent them. Sellers benefit from increased exposure of their properties to the actual buyers who are searching for them. Sellers have a right to have their properties be where their best potential buyer is more likely to find them. Sellers have a right to hire a Realtor based upon savvy skill sets and commitment to get the job done.

Accurate info is more likely to come directly from a Realtor. And, we have many rules and regulations demanding it. Media sites are far less concerned with the accuracy of data, and far more concerned with building hit count and selling advertising space….their source of revenue and mission. The mission of a Realtor is to bring sellers and buyers together. Their livelihood depends upon it. How many times I have heard complaints about outdated or inaccurate data on third party media sites? Yikes! Too many. It makes more sense to promote, not deny, the Realtors to index property data from MLS.

NAR, an organizations that you must pay to get the title of “Realtor.”

The ethics training that differentiates you from the primordial ooze that has no ethics is not extrapolated from the real estate agent gene pool after taking the “mandatory” ethics training classes. You either have ethics or you don’t!

I am not any more proud of the title…just feel like the “mafia” is protecting me for a fee. Protecting me from what…I have yet to understand?

NAR is a slow moving dinosaur the will go the way of the “dodo” bird should they not evolve with the times.

Our local board is made up of a number of “school marms” that had to find a job after they failed as “Realtors.” Their job is to implement fines for incorrect MLS listings and hold lots of meeting that “Realtors” have to pay for to get information that is freely available in a Google search…coincidentally. The thought of any of these employees making a decision affecting search engine IDX and its ability to find my MLS listings is a threat to my future as a “Realtor.”

I applaud any efforts to challenge NAR rules of “scraping.”

I think we need to get NAR along with Al Gore (inventor of the internet) in the same room and have Mr. Gore redesign the internet…that would solve this matter.

If the above sounds absurd…I have archived my objective. NAR = absurd!

Revolt now…stand up for your clients fiduciary concerns and fight these feeble minded decisions that you are paying NAR to make!

I am not “Confused Consumer” but he echoed my comment prior. The point is not that an agent does not do but that an agent is able to do. If an agent is not updating their own website, blogging about their listings, never gained the knowledge, etc then that is their own fault and quite possibly a good question for consumers to ask when interviewing an agent.

Instead of railing on an anonymous poster, acknowledge that their point is valid as was mine before that no one decided to respond to.

Jay: Google scrapes but is not a “scraper site. Here is a quote from my original comment here …

The way Google works, it scrapes the text from your site on a listing that may be owned by another broker, links back to your site as if you were the owner of the listing, and the true owner of the listing isn’t revealed until they are on your site. You have effectively drawn in a potential buyer by advertising a listing that is not your own – which is illegal/unethical – and do not disclose the true owner of the listing until the buyer is on your web page with the full IDX info. It may not be your intent to misrepresent but that is what happens.

Now even though an agent isn’t necessarily trying to be malicious, is this not considered misappropriation? Now, if we want to redefine or more clearly define misappropriation, than I say that’s a conversation worth having.

James, that would be a great conversation…but not here in this thread of a different topic. of course in that discussion one would point out that the owner of the listing was consenting to putting their listing in the IDX in the 1st place and if they didn’t like its ramifications–such as less exposure for their Seller’s home on the web–they could opt out of placing the listing in the IDX. However some MLSs do not have that option. And if that it bothersome to agents in their markets it’s a rule change worth pursuing.

I also do not know of any MLS where the listing broker of record is not required both in the detailed version of the listing and the summary/snippet version of the IDX listing. So I do not know that would be an issue.

Write a column on it and start the conversation, Malanowski.

@ Concerned Consumer:

Just having your listing for example placed on your agent’s website and not in the IDX does not mean it would get indexed by google. Most agents have very stagnant websites without a regular flow of new content and therefore are crawled rather infrequently by google. And this is especially often the case with big time listing agents who often operate in the 20th century with their newspaper ad campaigns to get new listings. You almost never find their websites when you search for homes for sale or city state real estate….

Here is the email I sent to both Cliff & Steve:

Dear Sirs:

I am extremely concerned that MIBOR & NAR support of the interpretation of Google Indexing as something contrary to the rules & regulations for members is a poor, shortsighted policy.

Seeing that NAR has been supporting and encouraging its members to participate in today’s cyber marketplace (ePRO® designation?), endorsing this ruling is contradictory to the actions and teachings of the national industry body. Our industry is behind the curve – especially in the eyes of the consumer, in competing within the electronic market. To classify someone who utilizes Google Indexing as a rogue agent, subject to sanctions is akin to teaching a person to eat with a fork then applying handcuffs and denying food because they might be more acceptable in public situations.

NAR constantly touts the fact that over 80% of all buyers find their homes on the internet, is constantly improving REALTOR.com and providing more detailed information to the consumer—because the consumer demands it—buyer AND seller. To deny its members the right to compete on a level playing field with non-member agents is irresponsible and backwards. Today’s marketplace IS on the internet and tomorrow’s too. If we don’t evolve with the marketplace to satisfy the demands of the consumer, then NAR will lose its viability as the voice of the industry.

I implore you to revisit this interpretation of the rules, as another look at it may provide the opportunity to correct a bad policy.

@ James Malanowski – “Instead of railing on an anonymous poster, acknowledge that their point is valid as was mine before that no one decided to respond to.” — Your response demonstrates a level of professionalism that can be lacking in these types of discussions.

@ Arlington real estate guy – “Just having your listing for example placed on your agent’s website and not in the IDX does not mean it would get indexed by google. Most agents have very stagnant websites without a regular flow of new content and therefore are crawled rather infrequently by google. And this is especially often the case with big time listing agents who often operate in the 20th century with their newspaper ad campaigns to get new listings. You almost never find their websites when you search for homes for sale or city state real estate….”

— I said, “An agent’s personal listings CAN still be indexed in Google for consumers to find. IDX listings CAN still be displayed on cooperating broker’s websites for consumers to find.”

— IF and HOW an agent or broker chooses to market their listings is their decision to make.

— WHICH agent or broker a consumer chooses to use is their decision to make. If the consumer wants to take into account agent and/or broker advertising policies when making their decision they can.

Jay: I agree, this argument has gotten absurd and the main issue has been lost and people are arguing about 3 or 4 different things here. As I stated in my original comment, NAR and MIBOR isn’t saying that IDX isn’t allowed, they’re saying we need to do everything in our power to prevent it from being “scraped.”

I do believe the term “scrape” needs to be more clearly defined (I think we all agree on this point) because in the general public’s view scraping is related to a malicious act which search engines are obviously not doing. However, using the loose definition, indexing = scraping BUT scraping when related to “scraper sites” is a completely different animal. Would everyone feel better if NAR came back and said they agree with you and made the rule read “A REALTOR must do everything in their power to prevent scraping and indexing of IDX feeds?” 🙂 That would get people REALLY pissed off, I’m sure, but I could see them doing it.

As I stated in my prior comments, the way Google indexes can make an IDX snippet appear to be a listing owned by the site it has indexed which may or may not be the site of the broker that owns the listing. This may be considered to be against IDX policy and a form of “misappropriation” of IDX data.

Now, the intent as I understand it, of NAR and the MLS in general, is to protect the proprietary IDX feed where brokers have signed on to allow advertising of their listings by other brokers in the manner deemed appropriate by the IDX rules. The NAR/MLS is not saying anything about brokers/agents advertising their OWN listings and allowing them to be indexed. How you )and others here) translate that to mean NAR is against listings being indexed totally or “No real estate agent can have a web site” is completely confusing to me.

Your own example of your SEO building for Agritopia proves my point. Agents that properly use the tools available to everyone can rank highly for whatever terms they wish and often times blow the big guys out of the water – IDX or no IDX. I also receive a lot of calls from buyers and agents about other listings that are not mine solely because my name is all over the internet for my market area and keywords. I do not have an indexed IDX but I do blog my listings and submit them to the “enemy” (Zillow, Truilia, R.com, etc).

3rd party sites do not have to deal with IDX rules because they aren’t using an IDX feed. WE, the listing agents/brokers, are GIVING them the information and then we have the nerve to sit back and bitch about how much higher they rank than the typical RE agent site?? This I don’t understand.

I see nothing, nor do I get the feeling that NAR is trying to restrict the advertising we do on our listings they are only protecting the IDX feeds as we know them. If it’s the IDX rules we don’t like we should be trying to change those.

Arlington RE Guy: This is exactly the conversation that should have been happening – somewhere along the line it went off in 15 different directions.

As far as I know, EVERY MLS has the option for a broker to opt out of IDX … I believe it’s a part of the IDX rules. And yes, IDX rules require that the listing broker info be in every feed. I believe this is the whole problem NAR/MLS has with this topic … The search engine’s indexing of the listing data probably will not include the broker info as the index snippet usually scrapes (there’s that word again!) the first few lines of the data whereas the broker info is typically towards the end and therefore would not get indexed as part of the snippet shown in the search results.

I’d be willing to be that if there was a way the the broker info was included in the index snippet EVERY TIME this would be a non-issue and we could go on and start bitching about how R.com treats us like crap instead!

Whoops, “Let’s just hope we don’t wake up tomorrow to yet another policy “clarification” where the ability to do that hasn’t been taken away.” should read, “Let’s just hope we don’t wake up tomorrow to yet another policy “clarification” where the ability to do that HAS been taken away.”

Sure wish we could edit comments here….

>>I’d be willing to be that if there was a way the the broker info was included in the index snippet EVERY TIME this would be a non-issue<<

James, from my understanding of the analysis made (indexing = scraping, and intent and results do not matter), including the listing broker name wouldn’t make a difference to the conclusion reached by NAR and MIBOR. Moreover, many (if not most) IDX policies do not require display of the listing broker on the summary or short display display page but rather only on the detail page. When users click through from Google, the required disclosures about ownership of the listing information are present. Accordingly, I don’t see how indexing goes against IDX policy in terms of disclosure of the listing broker information.

Jay: No worries … I understood your intent. And I do take intent into consideration unlike NAR! 🙂

Michael: Okay, fair enough. Now we’re back to changes in technology. When IDX first came around, I’d venture to say that the designers of the original IDX solutions never envisioned the IDX system coming out of a framed solution. Now that we have the capability the rules need to be revisited as many have pointed out already. If the change needed is as simple as having separate definitions for “scraping” and “indexing” and allow one and not the other, GREAT. Something tells me that there’s something more behind the reasoning, though.

All: Please understand, I’m playing the Devil’s Advocate here and trying to understand why the NAR did what they did. I am not necessarily opposed to indexing IDX data. I don’t really see the need for it other than for the agents that have no listings of their own and are trying to build their web presence on the backs of others instead of their own content. If you want to take a RSS feed of my listings to advertise them on your site, more power to you … My purpose in life is to get my listings sold. The more places they’re out there the better off I am.

I could not get through 392 comments so I apologize if someone brought up this point (if someone did, let me know so I can shake their hand if we meet).

This decision does not belong to Realtors as a group and perhaps not to listings agents (unless authorized by their clients) but it belongs, in right, to THE HOMEOWNER. Has anyone bothered to ask them?

The recent NAR-DOJ settlement gives the home seller the right to decide the extent of internet marketing, including none at all. ANY MLS that usurps this owners right runs the risk of a class action for interference with prospective economic advantage or similar type tort that says ‘Don’t get in the way of my sale”.

Hi Todd. Is the kitchen getting hot?

James – Even in the snippet view of many listings, my IDX does state the listing brokers name. It is also on the detailed view. No violations here!

James, what do you mean R dot com is not an idx feed, if not it is a raw data feed from our MLS’s and they put it in the fields like they want to.

They download from A2 every day several times, in smaller MLS’s it is not everyday.

It is a feed, whether it is IDX or raw data, I don’t know but they get their data from us. Just sayin’.

“I am really trying to stay on task here, but have to ask – how is it that they can open the data to Google through R.com?”

It’s a great question for r.com. It’s my understanding that they give Google special access that is not open. If you could figure out how to replicate what they do for a reasonable amount of money, and without getting banned by Google, you wouldn’t have a problem.

Todd – A misunderstanding here – let me rephrase; how is it they (the local boards) can provide the data to R.com for Google to index?

Special access that is not open – what exactly does that mean? Not open to what?

Why should I have to try to figure out what they are doing without getting banned from Google? I should be allowed access to the feed because I am a dues paying member not because I have a special deal with the NAR or the local boards.

IF Google is a scraper site, then the NAR and local boards should be equally concerned about the data being fed to R.com as they are about the data displayed on my site.

jfsellsius – I like the comparison with the Betamax issue. Even if you prevent “scraping” (as it works now), if someone really wants the data, they’ll get it. Whether they (being people who want the data for their own nefarious purposes) scrape a site or employ people to cut and paste text, images, and code – they will find a way to do it (DRM anyone?)

When we submit listings to our MLS there is a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ box for adding that listing to the IDX searches. If you do not want your listing to show up under other brokers IDX’s then you can do it here.

To take away the ability of the REALTORS to put these listings in front of their consumers makes no sense! Giving that ability to other sites that are just advertising machines and not REALTORS makes even less sense.

P.S. Is it just coincidence that Trulia has a banner ad at the bottom of this page?!

I am all for syndicating to broker/agent sites, but not other sites

Unfortunately, I am no longer surprised at these types of decisions by NAR.

Ever since the MLS decision fiasco and their so called independent researchers, I’ve lost complete faith in them doing anything that actually helps their members.

Their methods are out dated and tend to side on hurting their members rather than helping.

I wouldn’t be surprised if this was yet another ploy for them to push more agents to only advertise on r.com and force agents websites into oblivion.

I had a few phone calls with MLS Committee members. Thanks Jim Duncan for bringing up this as a suggestion! I took your suggestion to heart. It’s great that we discuss the issue here, and there is do much value in the viral nature of this thread, and the power of AG. Additionally, this message needs to reach others who might not come here. For some MLS Committee members, this is a verbal discussion that contained many foreign terms and concepts. I wrote a summary sheet for MLS Committee members that lightly explains indexing, scraping, framing, along with the challenges and opportunities presented by the current rule. I wrote this summary to provide as a follow up to the conversations.

Although it really is a summary vs. a typical blog post. I did throw this up on a WordPress blog on a URL that has just been parked and collecting dust. OK…the domain name is RiverPurple….so go figure that one out. Because I just went live with the URL today, it won’t come up on a SERP. But, you can get it via link or in the address bar. It’s not really a blog…but Worldpress is such a great vehicle and served the purpose of giving me a place to park the summary.

I also emailed the document as a PDF in follow up to telephone conversations.

If anyone finds my summary useful for any discussions they might have, feel free to use it.

Online via WordPress via the link on my name for this post. There’s also a link for a PDF there.

Daniel’s quote is in the summary…..and I am DMing him to ask him if I can attach his name in place of Realtor DR.

If anyone thinks I need to tweak this or make any corrections…please let me know. Tks much! My litmus test was to give this to someone who didn’t even know what an IDX was to see if they could understand it. After reading it, they told me that it was like not letting anyone come in the library and read the books there, because a few people might break copyright laws by making copies.

I am driving to DC from NJ tomorrow. Hope to see some of you Wed night at Petits Plats at 7pm.

Please……if any tweaks or changes are needed on this, do let me know.

Deb

Deborah,

The River Purple site works well…and I appreciate the link to “Retechulous.Com,” but it’s not working 🙂

[Seeing it in lights, I’m regretting the “NAR-Blow’s” category nomenclature slam a bit. Probably a little crude, I know…but at least I didn’t make fun of anyone’s tie 🙂 ]

Hi Ryan and also Daniel,

I fixed the link…it should work now. Sorry 🙁

I was unphased by the subdomain name. I really thought it was very telling and educational to illustrate that the barn door is already open. Demanding that Paula refrain or modify her website does not protect data and guarantee data integrity.

What you did was great……as a demonstration.

I did not identify Daniel by name, but rather by his initials. So, Daniel…..I am more than happy to edit the intials to full name and link. I fully acknowledged that the quote was not from me, but another Realtor. Daniel’s quote was blunt…..and so spot on.

It’s great that Ryan made this feed, Michael imparts expertise and we have great representatives in Paula and Jay. So thanks to all…including the many who were not mentioned by name.

We have links to Deborah’s write-up and Paula’s original article (this) on our Facebook event page for tonight’s REALTOR Mixer at PetitsPlats (.com) across from Woodley Park Metro in DC, 7 p.m. 2653 Connecticut Ave. 20008 — so please join the discussion, online, by phone or in person! Twitter updates likely – RealtyLee

This is bizarrely strange, the impact of which has still not fully realized itself. I have to wonder if there will come a time when sellers will get wind of these rules, realize the handcuffs they place on their agents ability to market their own homes and begin refusing to sign over the copyrights of their homes, images and details to be turned into listings owned by the MLS.

That day is coming.

The idea is to sell homes. The sooner the better. With >70% of homebuyers going to the internet first, we are all better off with more access not less. As Jeff Johnson wrote, “give access to all the data, make it easy for smart agents and brokers to use technology to SERVE consumers.” Amen Brother.

“If Paula’s site had a framed solution it would not be scraped/indexed therefore eliminating the problem.”

Google can and does index content within frames depending on how the frame is set up. Page rank can flow as well.

@jsellsius has it right with regard to the DOJ. Unfortunately, I still think the only thing NAR will understand is a lawsuit.

Tulia posted and open letter to Sky Realty
trulia.com/blog/pierre_calzadilla/2009/05/an_open_letter_to_mr_red

I don’t believe we’ve seen the final round with NAR/DOJ; as independent contractors, we have little choice but to join NAR, even when the majority disagrees with it’s stance on issues like this one. This and at the local level, the information being owned by controlling powers in the market or among boards is just as troubling. Is is possible that a national real time database by a third party entity to replace the local boards’ and NAR’s control of the information will be the game changer that technology has brought to other industries?

Kevin- actually your RPAC contributions help more than anything else NAR does.

i don’t disagree with your sentiment Kevin. in fact, i hope these desires can effect some real change. what would an improved NAR look like? what goals would you have to making things ‘better’?

Brad – I believe you are right about a tipping point. We can’t let this opportunity to make a change be lost. I also wonder about a future of new leaders in the industry – first, take back or get rid of R.com. Then bring in the best and brightest leaders at the local level, who are commited to agents success.

Finally, the beginning of the END of the MLS monopoly! Third parties will rule very soon.

Quoted from Four People Who Don’t Get The Internet – https://www.webpronews.com/topnews/2009/05/21/four-people-who-dont-get-the-internet

“Entrenched power and money structures need predictability and control if they are to continue to succeed. And that makes the Internet a problem for them, not for the rest of us. “The Internet” carries the only current populous hope of the people and it’s driving the powers that be absolutely crazy, save for Nader, who just thinks it’s pointless.”

“It isn’t lack of control that’s the problem, nor populism, nor cultists, nor fragmentation. It’s the ever-increasing desire of the few to control what has become the masses’ medium of choice. Governments, ISPs, Entertainment, Newspapers, and Others want this new Wild West reformed into something orderly, something controlled, something (immensely) profitable. The desire to lump “the Internet” under one easily understood label is only very nearly as strong.”

The Justice Department may need another call. Here inlays the problem, everybody is entitled to the same benefit as Realtors….Anyone…..not just certain ones….any Realtor. Some however, got innovative and learned how to get their IDX solution search optimized and now do a better job of advertising listings than Those folks who actually take the listings. So, maybe its time for the folks who b & moan to update their business model or become irrelevant to real estate. No, but not doing nothing for clients and expecting a commission still seems to be best preserved.

This has nothing to do with rules, this has to do with the blatant and perverse anti-competitive business promotion by a bunch of old stalwarts running boards around the country. The exact same anti – competitive issue that was Addressed by The Department of Justice These folks had better get with the program before Trulia, or Zillow become the new MLS system. Pissing off Realtors who are innovative is the worst thing NAR and local boards. This rulling just further confirms my belif that cronyism and hipocrcacy has a love affair with brokers whom still belive clients come through the office front door. or whose only souce of advertising comes through Realtor.com…the NARs cash cow. Yes.. its nice to know Realors dues go protcect that golden goose. Sorry, I coulden’t publish my actual name for fear 2 old brokers would beat me down with an old MLS book.

This has gotten to the point of infuriating, i’m pissed.

Missy,
I received the alert in my email on a new comment. Thanks for the update!
Deb

Nuts.

Personally, I don’t think listings should get indexed although I will do it to remain competitive. I think it’s against our “exclusive right to sell” contract. Yeah, it gets more exposure, but we work hard and spend a lot of money to get the listing in the 1st place. Allowing someone to take advantage of my efforts is double you are oh in gee. I’m all about IDX and using technology to marketing yourself. I’ve been doing real estate Internet marketing for almost a decade now, but having one of my listings post as if it’s “Featured” on somebody else site is quite in fact plagiarism. Plagiarism is also wrong, and have always been an advocate of writing custom content. This is no longer taking advantage of technology. This is called cheating and lying since simply modifying an IDX data feed really doesn’t make anybody a good agent.

May I laugh before any of you who disagree with me laugh first? I’ve generated a shit load of business off the Internet by taking advantage of technology, and I will in fact do whatever is possible to remain competitive. However, I will trust my karma over trying to be sly or thinking some generic marketing strategy will make me rich before it makes me poor.

I say do business the right way instead of looking for ways to cheat those who are. Besides, simply getting at the top of serps doesn’t mean you’ll either be there for long, or convert any of those to sales. If you’re a cheater, pretty sure it will show when meeting the client in person.

Supporting tricky ways to prevent listings for better search results may be a good selling point when doing a listing presentation, but still comes down to being a cheater–and that people won’t trust. Funny that I wonder sometimes why people feel they can’t trust agents. Can’t beat ’em…join ’em I guess?

Great article. Overwhelming number of comments. At the end of the day I want to represent my seller and make sure a real live buyer can find their home when the buyer is ready willing and able to purchase it. And I want my buyers to be able to have simple easy efficient way to find the houses they want to look at. Thats really all I want.
Ken

Perhaps another (late, I realize) answer is in order to this question – we have a website with an IDX map-based search. Recently, we received an email from our provider, informing us that they can no longer provide IDX in our area. The reason, as I explored further, was that our MLS had decided to levy charges of $50 for each website, or $300 for an unlimited number of websites served with IDX by each provider. Our IDX provider had been providing IDX for the amazing price of $199/yr, which we thought was a wonderful buy for a great product. Problem is, it isn’t cost effective for them to continue in a market until they have large enough numbers to justify the monthly fees from our MLS.

It is my impression that our MLS board decided to structure these charges as they did to remove the lower priced IDX providers from the marketplace. Those lower priced IDX providers appeal to the new small brokerage on a budget. We were able to provide a search map reasonably at the prices our provider was able to offer. The large brokerages can easily afford $50, or even $100s per month for IDX maps for their websites, so now, they are in the catbird seat, if they are able to limit the number of small brokerages with their own websites providing the same or similar map based searches. I strongly suspect that this is the real reason they don’t want Google to index their data.

Perhaps Google is not attempting to become a “giant MLS” as some have theorized. An MLS really needs to be somewhat local in order to best serve the needs of its community of agents and buyers and sellers.

Our IDX provider now has a new map-based search, using Google data. It doesn’t sound as if Google is attempting to run IDX providers out of business, does it?

As an occasional listing agent, I’m delighted when anyone wants to feature my listings on their websites. (Wellllllllllll, perhaps not just ANYONE. I had quite a lot of difficulty a while back when the “Zestimate” on Zillow was tens of thousands of $ off base – they were using townhomes and homes in other, lesser neighborhoods as comps for a single family home in a very desirable neighborhood). But, most of the other sites which indexed our listing were respectful of the data and photos, and I believe they helped to sell the house. I deliberately posted our listing on as many other sites as I could find. So, I don’t think Google’s intent is evil. I think they are going for internet market share by providing as much information on any topic possible to the searching public. If we are able to provide map based search from Google data, when our own MLS has seemed so intent on overcharging in order to discourage us for purchasing IDX data from an MLS we already pay large monthly fees to support, we will be happy.

It surprises me that some folks seem to consider the use of IDX- or Google-data map based searches to be “cheating” or “stealing”. Do they not understand the benefits to them and to their clients which are garnered from multiple listing? Real estate is such a funny marketplace. I’m disappointed that we don’t all consider the needs of clients to get their homes sold or to find homes to buy are paramount, and that some agents’ selfish wishes to occasionally double end a transaction are of little importance in an ethical marketplace.

For those still following this saga (and honestly, you should be) just moments ago the NAR’s Board of Directors just passed, without debate, changes in the MLS policy that allows indexing of IDX listings:

Old Language:

2. Participants must protect IDX information from misappropriation by employing reasonable efforts to monitor and prevent “scraping” or other unauthorized accessing, reproduction or use of the MLS database.

New Language:

MLS participants may not use IDX-provided listings for any purpose other than display on their websites. This does not require participants to prevent indexing of IDX listings by recognized search engines.