Deep linking is perfectly legal in and of itself. It is merely a technology. How you use the technology is what’s relevant as far as the law goes. What usually is illegal is framing, displaying copyrighted photos (including thumbnails) and copyrighted text. Fair use is the standard defense but make sure your use is noncommercial or educational.
Factual data is free for everyone as far as copyright law goes.

Just wanted to clarify that Redfin is NOT a bottom feeder. We don’t know yet about Zillow, but I think it will be more like a Realtor.com at first and a bottom feeder in a second phase, same as Realtor. com did. But jury’s still out on that one.

The answer is simple. If the only thing of value that Merrill & it’s competitors produced was market data, they wouldn’t be worth that much. The value they create is that full service broker can increase & protect a client’s assets better than a client can alone. If a broker can make more money with my money than I can, I’m happy to split the profits with them. I’ll be better off and so are they. Remeber, data does not equal knowledge.

Similarly, if Mr. Consumer is confident that their services aren’t worth the premium they charge, he’s welcome to open an account at Schwab & other discount brokerages and go it alone. And if he makes a killing or get killed in the market. If he makes a killing, the rewards are his & the IRS’s alone. If he get’s killed, he’ll have no one to blame but himself.

The value that a real estate agent creates is leveraging their knowledge about a the market to address a client need in a more cost effective manner, than the client can do alone. There will always be people who will pay the premium for the experience and the convenience of having a full service agent. Similarly, there will be people who want to save a buck or ten thousand and go it alone. If a professionally trained agent can’t sell house for more, or buy a house for less, than a client could do alone, what value are they creating for the consumer?

Why are the MLSes afraid to give consumers the option of paying for service, or not paying for non-service? I think the answer is obvious, everybody wants the 6% gravy train to continue, despite the fact that it cannot.

RedFin and Zillow aren’t bottom feeders. They are brokers that have as much right to the data as you do. They just believe that they can use technology to lower the price of a transaction for a customer, give them a competitive advantage over traditional brokerages, make some venture capitalists and others wealthy, and still have a profitable business at the end of day. How can you stop RedFin & Zillow, without killing Coldwell Banker, Windermere, John L Scott, etc?

If the MLS doesn’t give Mr. Consumer what he wants, he’ll just FSBO his house on Craigslist, eBay and anyplace else where there are lots of cheap eyeballs. Eventually, this alternate marketplace, could become viable, and perhaps even dominant. Does the MLS want to become the next newspaper classified advertising? The MLS may control the data, but they don’t control the people who write the checks.

Sure, the MLS can bottle up the data and prevent Trulia, PropertyShark and non-brokers from getting at current data. Maybe the MLS can take the next step, take all data off the web, require that everybody views all MLS data w/ DRM enabled viewers that show CAPTCHAs instead of computer OCR-able text? Perhaps, they’ll resort back to books, and format the database server’s hard drive?

The people who write the checks have decided they like the internet and all it does for buyers & sellers. It enables a more efficient marketplace. The MLSs can change to that new reality or they can join the buggy whip & the stock ticker on the scrap heap of history.

Robbie says, “I think what the MLSs are missing is that the data only has value if consumers can use it the way they want to use it.”

Robbie, what value is it to a real estate company to give data on a website that “consumers can use (it) the way they want to use it”?
What you propose would result in a seller paying $495 to put the home in the mls and the buyer going directly to the seller to buy it. Total fees paid $495. Total agents in picture 0.

It’s like a plumber spending money on writing a manual on how to do your own plumbing repairs and giving it to you for free. Why? So you don’t have to call him?

Please explain Robbie, why the agents and real estate companies should give anything at all. Why shouldn’t they just start their own private sharing mode (which is what mls is supposed to be) and opt out of the whole thing. They clearly CAN put that horse back in the barn.

Now tell me why they should not do that? From THEIR perspective, not from the consumer’s perspective. MLS is not a “Public Service Announcement” to the world of what is for sale. It is a private announcement to its members, and clearly it needs to get back there for the real estate industry to be profitable without Redfins and Zillows and bottom feeding sites.

(Ardell, not buttom feeders )

Does it make sense?

If they keep it all to themselves, consumers will seek out alternatives(and their data’s value will be dramatically reduced). So when do RedFin & Zillow go public again?

Craig