REALTOR^® A, a residential broker in a major metropolitan city, spent several weeks each year in his cabin in the north woods where he planned to retire one day. Even while at home in the city, REALTOR^® A stayed abreast of local news, events, and especially the local real estate market by subscribing to the print and on-line editions of the local newspaper. He also bookmarked a number of north woods brokers' websites to stay current with the market and to watch for potential investment opportunities.

One evening while surfing the Internet, he came across a URL he was unfamiliar with-northwoodsandlakesmls.com. REALTOR^® A was pleased to see the MLS serving the area where he vacationed for so many years had created a publicly-accessible website. Clicking on the link, he was surprised to find that the website he was connected with was not an MLS's website but instead was REALTOR^® Z's company website. Having had prior dealings with REALTOR^® Z, REALTOR^® A spent some time carefully scrutinizing the website. He noted, among other things, that the name of REALTOR^® Z's firm did not include the letters MLS.

REALTOR^® A sent an e-mail to the association's executive officer asking whether REALTOR^® Z had been authorized by the association to use the URL northwoodsandlakesmls.com and whether the association felt it presented a true picture as required by Article 12 of the Code of Ethics. The association executive responded that their association did not assign, review, or approve URLs used by their members, but added that if REALTOR^® A felt a possible violation of the Code of Ethics had occurred, the appropriate step was to file an ethics complaint. REALTOR^® A did just that, alleging in his complaint that when he clicked on what appeared to be a real estate-related URL that included the letters "MLS" he expected to be connected with a website operated by a multiple listing service. He stated he felt that REALTOR^® Z's URL was deceptive and did not meet Article 12's true picture test.

At the hearing, REALTOR^® Z defended his URL on a number of grounds including the fact that he was a participant in good standing in the MLS and that he was authorized under the MLS's rules to display other participants' listings on his website. "If I used "MLS" in the name of my firm, I could see how that might be perceived as something less than a true picture," he argued, "but by simply using MLS in my URL I am telling consumers that they can get MLS-provided information about properties in the north woods from me. What could be truer than that?"

What do you think the hearing panel concluded? Show Answer