Tom Jacobson and John Rees have a new blog post explaining some of NAR's recent clarifications of the VOW policy. They're less wordy than I'm prone to being, so I figured I'd link to their good work rather writing my own post. Comments and discussion are still welcome here, of course.
-Brian
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Brian, thanks for posting this entry, it was very interesting. I did leave a comment there and would much enjoy your take on my question, if you feel so inclined.
@John: Looks like comments on their site are moderated as yours does not show up yet. Feel free to post a copy of it here, and I'll look at and give feedback if I have anything to add.
-Brian
Thanks Brian.
My mls is working through the Seller Opt Out form to insure compliance with Section 19.6 of the rules NAR has directed us to adopt. This rule states that a Participant shall not display listings or addresses which have been withheld by Seller from the display on the Internet. Yet, it seems as though the intent of the VOW is to allow a Broker to offer all the information which would normally be available in a brick and mortar office in the VOW (such as in Sold Listings).
Since a VOW should not be accessible to search engines and their robots, and since Participants must agree to Terms of Use which must prohibit public display and access on the Internet, one could say that a VOW is a part of an INTRANET, with the data dispensing MLS. If this is the case, then it does not make sense to prohibit listings from display on a vow just because they have been marked “Internet no.” At the very least, Sellers who desire to withhold their listings from the Internet (to avoid public display), but wish to allow all brokers to market their property should have a third choice (opt out question 3: Internet no VOW yes.) On the other hand, the argument could be made that if a Seller has the desire to list on the MLS at all, then there is no difference between showing the listing in a brick office or in a VOW.
@John: I think you're right - logically, allowing the seller to opt out of display on VOWs as part of her opting out of "Internet display" makes little sense. After all, most MLS systems are themselves 'on the Internet' (i.e. are web-based). I assume NAR negotiated this, and I don't know why the DoJ agreed to it, but that's the way it is.
As a practical matter, there are workarounds for VOW-operating brokers. The policy allows for those listings where sellers op out of Internet display still to be emailed to consumers. Thus, when the consumer searches the VOW, it can display a link that says, "Three more listings match your criteria that cannot be displayed on this web site because of MLS policies - click here and we'll email them to you." That seems silly to me.
-Brian
I am glad to see you agree with my thinking.
In my opinion, the work around (whether email, Faxing or snail mailing the listing) just points up how absurd this part of the rule is.
Here's another question along this line. If a listing has been checked "Internet no" but is accessible through a RETS feed to an application such as Wildfire or some other desktop application, I don't see that the current rules would prohibit sending the listing out through another media such as on a smart phone. If one broker can provide excluded info through non-internet media such as texting or mms (which from the public’s point of view would be equivalent to Internet access) then the spirit of the VOW rule is broken.
It seems to me that the rules for the dissemination of information through any media should be consistent. All rules could be divided into two categories:
A) Under Brokerage relationship and therefore private
B) Without any agency relationship and therefore totally public.
John: Yes, again I think you are making logical sense, and I value consistency much as you appear to do. (Even keeping in mind Emerson's warning: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.") Nevertheless, I don't think the VOW policy actually says these things.
Post a Comment