The Outlier
The docket says Zillow v. MRED. The testimony kept pointing at Compass.
If I’m not actively selling, writing about, or sitting in federal courtrooms for real estate, you’ll likely find me on a soccer pitch or watching a match. Almost as soon as Day One of the Zillow v. MRED trial ended, I found a great spot to post up and cheer on the US Men’s National Team as they faced off against Bosnia-Herzegovina.
For anyone even modestly following the World Cup action, you heard about the controversial red card that was issued to the US’s leading goal scorer. The initial call went to video review and, after watching the play over and over in slow motion, the referee decided to issue a red card, sending the player off for his conduct.
That is the referee’s prerogative. On that field and for those 90 minutes, he is the final authority on the rules and how they are to be enforced. No question there. But, play that replay before 100 FIFA referees, and I’d be willing to wager the majority of them would have ruled differently.
Majority rule doesn’t mean the referee who made the minority call was wrong. But it does raise questions: what were they seeing, what context informed their decision, and what other potential motivations may have factored into the final call?
As I reflect on the Zillow v. MRED hearing, I’m struck by how relevant these same questions are to the case at hand. Rebecca Jensen, the CEO of MRED, has proudly owned the title of being ‘the referee’ of Chicagoland real estate. It’s an honorable and weighty responsibility she and her team are entrusted with to fairly and neutrally enforce MRED’s rules across some 45,000 agent members.
From MRED’s perspective, this case boils down to one key point: Zillow willfully and blatantly broke the rules. They violated the terms of their data licensing agreement and, therefore, received the just consequence of having their listing feed from MRED cut off. Jensen, the referee, gave Zillow the red card.
Zillow’s lawsuit is the video replay equivalent that challenges Jensen’s call and asks hard questions about the underlying motivations. Their accusation is not merely that Jensen got the call wrong — it’s that MRED formed a privileged relationship with one of the teams on the field. Whether you follow sports or not, we all know that referees aren’t supposed to have home team favorites. So, did Compass receive ‘home team advantage’ in MRED’s enforcement of the objective criteria rule that led to the cutting of Zillow’s feed?
But there’s another related question I walked out of the courtroom chewing on: How different would this case be if MRED had never formed a partnership with Compass?
I know it’s a hypothetical, but let’s turn back the clock and undo the April 24 announcement that Compass was helping MRED go national, subsidizing the first 100,000 agents to join, and encouraging its agents to add all their listings into MRED’s MLS.
Would Zillow still have sued? They threatened MRED they would have. But MRED’s PLN has been operating for 10 years, and for over a year Zillow hadn’t enforced their Listing Access Standards in Chicagoland. How long could that status quo have persisted if it weren’t for Compass getting involved by adding listings Zillow had previously banned into MRED’s system?
Let’s say Zillow still sued, but Compass was not involved in the suit. How would the optics of the case be different? As MLSs go, MRED is one of the largest and most influential in the country. But as the real estate industry goes, at least by numbers like annual revenue and company size, MRED is tiny. That’s not intended as a knock. But it would have looked like Zillow was punching down. Imagine Lionel Messi suing a referee over a bad call. It wouldn’t be a great look. There’s a human tendency to root for ‘the little guy’ in any given battle.
As it is in this case, it’s more akin to Lionel Messi suing a referee and Cristiano Ronaldo over a bad call that went in Ronaldo’s favor. A call that the referee and Ronaldo had conspired over. That’s what Zillow is alleging between MRED and Compass.
And, again, that’s really what complicates this whole case. If Compass was never involved, this would be a legal case over the interpretation of the objective criteria rules in MRED and MLS Grid’s agreements with Zillow. We’d be debating the merits of whether Zillow is filtering the listings it displays by agent/brokerage or by property status type. From there, we’d get into the particulars of if ‘previously listed as a Private Exclusive’ is a legitimate ‘property status type’ criteria to filter by.
Important questions, no doubt. And, frankly, these are the questions MRED would love for this trial to be centered on: accurate interpretation and fair enforcement of their longstanding rules.
But, because of MRED’s partnership with Compass, those questions are pushed out of the spotlight and into the background. For Jensen and MRED on the whole, I think that’s genuinely unfortunate. My sense is their case would be stronger and they would find more sympathy if the only thing being adjudicated were data licensing rules.
As it is, while this reads as a ‘Zillow v. MRED’ case on the judge’s docket, Compass is just as much the main character in this story as MRED — more so even in some ways.
The question is: why?
A little over a month ago, I wrote a piece titled The Kingmaker. There, I argued that to fight Zillow’s Listing Access Standards (ZLAS) and safeguard their three-phase marketing (3PM) strategy, Compass needed to form strategic alliances with MLSs who were ‘Compass-aligned.’
As the testimony — especially of Robert Reffkin — revealed, Zillow’s Standards have dealt a significant blow to Compass’s 3PM. Understandably, home sellers are more wary of first listing their home as a Private Exclusive in Phase 1 if doing so means their home will not appear on Zillow in the public Phase 3. As of today, Zillow dominates the consumer market with 2-3 times more unique users than its closest competitors.
For 3PM to succeed, ZLAS must go. Which is precisely the point of Zillow’s Standards — blocking 3PM and preventing the proliferation of PLNs. If ZLAS are weakened, Zillow loses access to their most valuable asset: brand-new listings.
That’s the real war. Data licensing rules are just one small battlefield.
Which brings us back to the question: How did MRED — the referee — get caught up in the controversy?
This is where I thought the testimonies offered the past few days were most telling.
I was really impressed with Rebecca Jensen. She struck me as intelligent, grounded, and appropriately passionate about her role within MRED. I respect her tremendously.
In her testimony, she shared the historical context of MRED forming and writing its objective criteria rules in 2008, just on the heels of a landmark settlement between the DOJ and NAR. That case centered on MLSs who had been compromised by powerful brokerages who were manipulating MLS rules to disadvantage smaller brokerages and prevent new entrants from competing in the market. The settlement included strict rules for how listings could be filtered and displayed, summed up as the objective display criteria. MRED’s own rules were modeled after the very language of this settlement.
Over the past year since Zillow announced their Standards, Jensen shared the timeline of communications she had with Zillow leaders, explaining how ZLAS were incompatible with MRED’s rules around objective display criteria for filtering listings. These conversations culminated in Zillow saying, if MRED didn’t change their position, they’d be left with no choice but to sue. Jensen described feeling backed into a corner. It’s her genuine belief that ZLAS violate not just MRED’s rules, but also the terms of the 2008 DOJ/NAR settlement. Her options therefore were to risk being sued by Zillow, or risk being investigated and sued by the DOJ.
I think any of us can appreciate that tension. And choosing to hold to her convictions on her interpretations of the rules and risk a lawsuit from Zillow, rather than capitulate and risk DOJ action is honorable. I also think it’s important to keep in mind that, as a consequence of this decision, she was expecting Zillow to sue MRED at some point in the near future.
From the communications shown in court, it appears that Compass initiated the conversation about partnering with MRED in February 2026. A Feb. 21, 2026 email from Jensen to Reffkin stated, “I really appreciate your offer to share Compass Private Exclusive Listings with MRED…” Reffkin replied later that day, “Thank you. I will call to discuss.”
Zillow’s attorneys shared another email from Reffkin within Compass, stating, “What Rocket-Redfin was for stopping the Zillow ban on Coming Soons, MRED has the possibility to be for Private Exclusives.” The email also linked to a LinkedIn post from a Compass agent claiming that Zillow could not afford to implement its LAS in Chicagoland because doing so would be “too costly.” Reffkin reposted the original post, adding the text, “Thank you MRED.”
On partnering with Compass, Jensen framed the decision as a no-brainer. From her standpoint, I can see why. It has been her goal to grow and expand MRED’s territory and influence since 2015. She is passionate about the need for MLSs to compete as a way of ensuring the best service to agents, brokers, and their clients. She also believes MRED’s own PLN plays a vital role in serving home sellers with unique circumstances. She shared a few stories of sellers who were signing listing agreements with “tears on the page” because they were needing to sell amid domestic violence issues or while entering into hospice. She contended that such sellers should not be forced into a one-size-fits-all way to list and market their home. In her framing, MRED’s PLN exists to serve such sellers.
Compass shared an aligned vision for the future of the industry, and Compass promised to bring 100,000 agents and countless listings across their portfolio of brands to aid in MRED’s goals to become an MLS with national reach and influence. Any outside observer can appreciate how the potential of tripling their growth with an aligned partner who also happens to be the most prominent and powerful brokerage in the real estate industry today makes a ton of sense on paper. And, if Jensen was already expecting Zillow to sue, it couldn’t hurt to add the firepower of Compass’s legal team.
On April 24, 2026, MRED published a press release, officially announcing their partnership with Compass. One of the sections in that release reads, “MRED also commits to protect and safeguard agents who participate in its PLN from being banned or penalized by third party portals and IDX feed recipients.” Translation: MRED will protect participating agents from ZLAS.
Later that same day, April 24, Reffkin texted Jensen saying, “I’m connecting you to Neda who is the president of Compass. She is going to help a few dozen Compass agents that have been banned to sign up today.”
What happened over the next few days is a handful of out-of-state Compass agents who had listings previously banned by Zillow signed up with MRED and entered those listings into MRED’s MLS. Text and email communications show that, at Compass’s encouragement, MRED was keeping a record of those agents who complained that their MRED listings were not showing up on Zillow. Once verified, MRED sent Zillow notice that they were in violation of their data licensing agreement and would have 10 days to cure (that is, resolve the issue) or else they’d lose their data feed.
There were nine out-of-state listings (in CA, GA, and FL) that Zillow had previously banned for violations of its Standards. Zillow refused to cure, and on May 20, 2026, MRED cut their feed, causing approximately 43,000 listings to disappear from Zillow’s site. The majority of those listings remained off the site until Judge Tharp granted a Temporary Restraining Order on May 22, 2026, requiring MRED to turn back on Zillow’s feed.
At least in this hearing, there was no ‘smoking gun’ communication between MRED and Compass to show that Compass knew with certainty or was given advance notice MRED was going to cut Zillow’s feed. Everyone from Compass and MRED who testified stated that they’d hoped Zillow would comply with MRED’s rules and did not want it to come to MRED cutting the feed. We should take them at their word — at least until proven otherwise.
Even so, we can say at the very least Compass knew it was a strong likelihood that Zillow would lose access to the feed because weeks in advance of MRED flipping the switch to ‘off,’ Compass had begun coordinating an extensive marketing campaign to capitalize on “Zillow doesn’t have all the listings.” Emails showed mock-ups of billboards and messaging strategies to deploy across Chicagoland and beyond that would highlight Zillow’s loss of the feed and point consumers to Compass.com.
I’m not the judge and, thankfully, it’s not my job to adjudicate. But there was enough here to make me say, “Huh. This sure seems like a coordinated effort.”
Now, a coordinated effort doesn’t necessarily mean foul play. Big companies are always mocking up marketing campaigns to capitalize on their competitors’ weaknesses. If MRED’s enforcement of the rules was legit and Compass was playing it smart by being prepared — fair play. It may be shrewd, but usually the best businesses are.
What’s questionable in my mind though is how Compass maneuvered to force this issue.
To be clear, before Compass had entered out-of-state listings into MRED, there was no active talk of MRED cutting Zillow’s feed. At least none that was revealed in court. Similarly, while Zillow had threatened a possible lawsuit against MRED, it had not issued one. That’s an important distinction.
The act that set everything into motion was Compass partnering with MRED, entering previously banned listings into MRED, then having those agents complain to MRED about them not displaying on Zillow, forcing MRED’s hand to either enforce their rules or waffle.
That’s a-whole-nother level of shrewdness.
And it wasn’t just MRED that Compass tried this play with.
In communications revealed between Compass and Brian Donnellan, CEO of BrightMLS, Reffkin used MRED as the example for other partner MLSs to emulate.
On April 10, 2026, Reffkin sent an email to Donnellan with MRED’s rule language and encouraged similar adoption. The next day, Donnellan replied, “We cannot take sides in a disagreement between your company and Zillow; rather, we will continue to ‘call balls and strikes’ based strictly on our established rules.”
Donnellan’s reply did not sit well with Reffkin. In a passionate reply, Reffkin told Donnellan that BrightMLS has “sold [Compass] out” and that he would not be speaking at Bright’s upcoming event he’d previously committed to.
Reffkin acknowledged from the stand that his email was emotional. And, I don’t fault him for that. I respect anyone who has a vision and relentless drive to see that vision realized. Much like Jensen, I respect the hell out of Reffkin — even for all the ways I strongly disagree with him and the vision he’s advocating.
But the strength of his passion does tell us something: these MLS partnerships are a key part of Compass’s growth strategy, which requires the dismantling of Zillow’s Listing Access Standards. That was the core thesis behind my Kingmaker piece and, at least in part, I’m even more convinced I was right.
The thing I under-appreciated in the Kingmaker was the strength of the MLSs Compass has partnered with. Inasmuch as my Kingmaker piece framed them as lackeys prepared to do Compass’s bidding — I was wrong. Very wrong. Brian Donnellan’s correspondence with Reffkin alone is enough to show that these MLS leaders have backbone.
Similarly with Jensen and MRED. Meeting her and hearing her side of things made me realize she’s acting out of sincerity — not desperation or manipulation.
Still, I come back to Jensen as the referee. If she’s a referee, so is Donnellan. As are the CEOs of the MLSs that contain the nine banned listings that started this whole drama. Those referees looked at the same play and called ‘no foul.’
Jensen issued a red card.
That doesn’t necessarily mean that Jensen made the wrong call. But, it does make the call the outlier — and therefore debatable. And, even if MRED’s proximity to Compass in the events leading up to the decision is all above board, the proximity itself raises eyebrows.
I won’t venture to guess which way the court rules. As the judge said, all parties conducted themselves with competence and professionalism. There’s a real case here and to pretend that either side walked out with a golden goal victory would be foolhardy.
But these dynamics are worth keeping an eye on. Reffkin made it clear that ZLAS has hurt the adoption of their 3PM strategy. Jensen called this lawsuit a contagion that has prevented other MLSs from innovating, adopting their own PLNs, or even working with MRED towards a shared vision of giving sellers more marketing options.
Zillow owns that it, too, is acting in its own self-interest: to protect a business model and brand promise that depends on having access to the most up-to-date and comprehensive set of listings. But it qualifies that, in this case especially, Zillow’s self-interest also aligns with the best interests of home sellers, buyers, and their agents.
Everyone has something on the line.
A disclosure on my editorial independence: As I’ve written about, Zillow paid for my trip to Chicago. But, true to their word, they did not pay me for my time, and not a single word of anything I’ve written has been run past anyone at Zillow before publishing. Over the past two weeks, I’ve also spoken with senior leadership at Compass, including a lengthy call with Robert Reffkin himself. No compensation was offered and no one at Compass is seeing this piece before it goes live. Both camps talk to me. Neither edits me. The opinions are my own. Hang around as a subscriber long enough and I’m sure you’ll see me criticize both sides on many occasions.
Genuinely, though: if there's something I'm missing or you feel I've misrepresented, I am all ears. If we're going to disagree, let's let the disagreements be over real things, not misunderstandings.
Want to Connect Further?
Connect with me on socials (I’m most active on LinkedIn) @NickAufenkamp
Tiered & Flat Fee Real Estate Services in SW Washington: The Tartan Team
DIY Homebuyer Resources & Advocacy: DIY Homebuyer Academy
Support the Writing
To maximize the distribution of my ideas, I keep this publication free. But, if you’ve read more than a couple of posts and value my voice, please become a paid subscriber. I typically spend 8-10+ hours on every post — usually writing in the middle of the night. And my wife says the coffee bill is getting out of hand.
Terrible use of VAR on that red- in live action, it’s clear Balogun’s moves weren’t maliscious. Love your insights and glad to know there’s another footy fan who also loves MLS policy!