I’ll be moderating the MLS panels at Inman Connect NY in January, One of the sessions outlined so far is “Breaking Data Taboos for Fun and Profit.” The idea for this session stemmed from the Connect Create session at Inman SF this last summer, where developers from two companies built two applications in 48 hours and then showed them off at the end of the conference. One of those applications was an agent rating service built by Diverse Solutions using some data from SoCal MLS.
During the demo of that product, Diverse’s President Justin Lajoie commented that he wasn’t sure if the product would ever see the light of day because MLSs would have to grant permission to use the sold data in this way. Brian Boero asked the brokers and agents in the audience if this was a product they’d like to see become real, and the response was definite: Yes, they would.
The question raised was pretty clear: How can MLSs better leverage the kind of rapid innovation available today? One potential answer is to create an API for the MLS data that’s easy to use and understand, especially the terms of use. Currently, the only terms of use for MLS data that are widely adopted by MLSs are IDX and VOW policies. Are those enough? Or could brokers and MLSs create more innovation by developing a new terms of use targeted at specific data sets?
For example, two potential use cases come to mind: (1) syndication or advertising of listings; and (2) aggregate statistical reports. In the case of syndication, the terms of use would focus on the limited set of data needed for advertising the listing and would include an opt-in from the listing broker. Having a standard API for syndication could increase the quality of listing advertising on the web and increase competition among aggregation sites.
In the case of aggregate statistical reports, the terms of use could focus on limiting use of the data for analysis and reporting in the aggregate as opposed to disclosing individual listings. Would a more limited terms of use focused on the aggregate instead of specific listings make it less threatening to brokers to open up the data to new and innovative uses? Are there any terms of use that would be able to be widely adopted or will MLS data use always be limited to policies like IDX and VOW?
Of course, these discussions do not happen in a vacuum. Just yesterday, Google made it easier to see real estate listings on their maps and they’re encouraging real estate professionals to post their listings to Google. Of course, Google has their own terms of use for posting information to their site. We also know that companies like RealBird are using Google Base as an alternative source for listing data, using Google’s API as a round-about way to get at the MLS data.
Is it time for MLSs to leverage the rapid innovation cycle by creating their own API? I’d love to hear from you in the comments below and also at Inman Connect NY.
A quick post this morning inspired by a Kristen Carr tweet about Liam Dayan’s post some time ago about using IDX and VOWs together. A quick excerpt from Liam’s post:
Frankly, handled right registration can be converted from being a barrier into being a feature. Think velvet ropes and VIP rooms. Also, that consumer objection to signing up is just generally getting quieter and smaller every day as people’s use of social networking mediums that demand sign-up for participation grows. Add single sign-on mechanisms, either individual or one of the social media platform initiatives like OpenID, etc. and this becomes negligible.
And BTW? There’s nothing in the language of the VOW agreement or any other I know of (big caveat on that one) that precludes a broker from maintaining both of those feeds. That introduces some interesting hybrid UX/reg-path possibilities. This is a very solvable problem.
This is all very relevant to our Summit meetings this week, where we’re covering a lot of material on our customer portals and how they create opportunities for improving service to customers through people data. Go read Liam’s entire post.
Over on our RETS Support site, we’ve posted a page about some new features we’ll be releasing on February 11 to help our MLS customers implement a VOW policy as required by the NAR/DOJ litigation settlement. The main change to flexmls Web is there will be new seller opt out options on the Export tab in listing maintenance. We’ve also made the data captured from these new flags available in the RETS Manager through a new VOW template type that can be set up according to the specific VOW policies each MLS adopts.
Let us know if any of you have any questions regarding these new features. Also, if you have questions about VOWs or the terms of the settlement, I encourage you to check out Brian Larson’s MLS Tesseract blog.
In his post MLSs Under the Gun, Brian Larson alerts us that all NAR-affiliated MLSs must adopt a VOW policy on or before February 15, 2009, to comply with the settlement in the NAR/DOJ litigation. Brian also provides some excellent checklists to help MLSs, vendors, VOW operators, and others prepare for the new policies. These materials are must reading for anyone involved with MLS data.
For FBS’s customers, the RETS Manager built into the flexmls Web system will help you provide the persistent download required by the settlement. However, as Brian points out, you’ll need to work to define what is confidential data. Importantly, for this purpose, confidential essentially means cannot be distributed in any manner (including printed reports, emails, etc.) to anyone outside the MLS. This is going to be a very, very small set of fields and likely not the same as what MLSs traditionally consider to be confidential information.
One additional item I’d point out is that the MLS needs to provide a way for sellers to specify that they do not want their listing or, alternatively, their address, displayed on a VOW. If the seller does opt-out of having their listing or address displayed in the VOW, they also must sign a document that affirms they understand the listing won’t be available on any of the web sites. Importantly, a question Brian poses and I share is:
Does the MLS have an affirmative responsibility to ensure that none of the data feeds it provides to Realtor.com, IDX sites, syndicators, and other web sites, include the listings or addresses of sellers who have opted out of such displays? In other words, does an MLS act inconsistently with the policy if it distributes listings the seller has withheld under this section to Realtor.com or the like?
That seems like a tall order.
What questions do you have about implementing the policy? Comment here or, better yet, over on Brian’s blog, MLS Tesseract.
I’m excited about the panel we’ve assembled for our FBS Summit on June 12 to discuss the issue of whether or not MLSs should have consumer-oriented listing search sites:
This panel brings a variety of perspectives on listing search sites, and we’ve convinced them to spend three hours with us so we can delve deeply into the issues. We’re going to have three one-hour sessions: (1) initial overviews by the panelists of their views; (2) a panel discussion moderated by me; and (2) round-table discussions with one panelist at each table for 12-15 minutes and then rotating to the next table until each table has had an opportunity to ask questions of each panelist.
With the recent settlement of the NAR/DOJ litigation on VOWs, I think this topic is more relevant than ever and I can’t wait to delve into the issues. If you have any questions you think I should ask of the panel, comment on this post and I’ll follow up after the event here with their responses.
Dustin pulled together a fun call with a great group. If you have a spare hour, enjoy.
Dustin Luther of 4realz e-mailed me a few hours ago wondering if I wanted to participate on a live podcast regarding the NAR/DOJ Settlement. The event starts at 4 p.m. Pacific time, 6 p.m Central time, and can be found here. You can both listen in and participate if you want. I think it’s going to be fun and hopefully interesting.
