The on-going battle between Zillow and NAR against local portal Real Estate Exchange (REX) is tipping in the favor of the two big-name companies.
REX had originally filed a claim against Zillow and NAR back in March, alleging that the shift to an IDX feed and a new segregation rule would spell harm for consumers and REX’s own business. The claim stated that this would unlawfully harm REX in the long-term.
Since then, the two national names have pushed back, stating that what REX is claiming is out of their control and does not violate antitrust laws.
Here is a comprehensive timeline of the events leading up to the most recent announcement from the Federal Court on Zillow, NAR vs. REX.
REX files brief stating that the segregation rule does not provide any consumer benefit. Zillow admits this is true. REX states that Zillow should end the segregation rule because it agrees that there is no added benefit, that it, in fact, confuses its consumerbase. The brief is backed up by research conducted by Dr. Robert Majure, the former lead antitrust economist at the U.S. Department of Justice, who highlighted pro-consumer benefits of ending the rule. REX concludes the brief by saying ending the rule would not only benefit REX’s business, but Zillow’s as well.