<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:gml="http://www.opengis.net/gml"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: DOJ suing NAR and the &#8220;opt out&#8221; clause</title>
	<atom:link href="http://raincityguide.com/2006/01/29/doj-suing-nar-and-the-opt-out-clause/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://raincityguide.com/2006/01/29/doj-suing-nar-and-the-opt-out-clause/</link>
	<description>Seattle&#039;s Leading Resource for Real Estate Information</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:47:42 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: ARDELL</title>
		<link>http://raincityguide.com/2006/01/29/doj-suing-nar-and-the-opt-out-clause/#comment-322695</link>
		<dc:creator>ARDELL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:33:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://raincityguide.com/?p=338#comment-322695</guid>
		<description>Jack,

Here&#039;s a video discussion of two friends of mine, Saul Klein and John Reilly, regarding the recent decision.  

http://www.realtown.com/about/resources/InternetListingDisplayResource


I see a couple of conflicting points regarding &quot;who can be a member of an mls&quot; and will listen to the video of John and Saul discussing this before commenting further.

The VOW/ILD/IDX is confusing and almost too confusing to put into lay terms.  

The &quot;opt out&quot; part is relatively simple and is basically what started the suit.  Broker J says I won&#039;t show &quot;discounter&#039;s&quot; listings on my site and he can&#039;t show mine.  That was the beginning of the problem.  But the issue of WHO can be a member of an MLS is more significant to me, as it appears that Saul and John are saying that sites like Estately.com (Galen&#039;s award winning site) where they do not actively list property for sale...could be engangered under the settlement.

So I have to do a bit more research on this...but remember, our mls is not necessarily affected by this case, as we are not an mls that is actively controlled by the Board of Realtors and is a separate entity.

I will listen to the discussion on the video and suggest you do the same.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jack,</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a video discussion of two friends of mine, Saul Klein and John Reilly, regarding the recent decision.  </p>
<p><a href="http://www.realtown.com/about/resources/InternetListingDisplayResource" rel="nofollow">http://www.realtown.com/about/resources/InternetListingDisplayResource</a></p>
<p>I see a couple of conflicting points regarding &#8220;who can be a member of an mls&#8221; and will listen to the video of John and Saul discussing this before commenting further.</p>
<p>The VOW/ILD/IDX is confusing and almost too confusing to put into lay terms.  </p>
<p>The &#8220;opt out&#8221; part is relatively simple and is basically what started the suit.  Broker J says I won&#8217;t show &#8220;discounter&#8217;s&#8221; listings on my site and he can&#8217;t show mine.  That was the beginning of the problem.  But the issue of WHO can be a member of an MLS is more significant to me, as it appears that Saul and John are saying that sites like Estately.com (Galen&#8217;s award winning site) where they do not actively list property for sale&#8230;could be engangered under the settlement.</p>
<p>So I have to do a bit more research on this&#8230;but remember, our mls is not necessarily affected by this case, as we are not an mls that is actively controlled by the Board of Realtors and is a separate entity.</p>
<p>I will listen to the discussion on the video and suggest you do the same.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://raincityguide.com/2006/01/29/doj-suing-nar-and-the-opt-out-clause/#comment-322672</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 14:51:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://raincityguide.com/?p=338#comment-322672</guid>
		<description>Apparently USDOJ v. NAR was just settled prior to going to trial. Can you explain it in lay terms?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apparently USDOJ v. NAR was just settled prior to going to trial. Can you explain it in lay terms?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
