Skip to content

More on CIVIX…

by Greg Robertson on June 16th, 2011

I got an interesting email from a source within Move. They clarify a bit the roles of Move and NAR in regard to the original CIVIX lawsuit.

“In the settlement cited by Robert, CIVIX sued both Move and NAR for alleged patent infringement on One of the benefits of the Operating Agreement is that Move is required to handle such matters on behalf of NAR. Move reached a settlement agreement with CIVIX and paid an undisclosed sum of money. This settlement, paid for by Move, covered Move, and NAR. NAR did not pay a penny of those settlement costs. However, the focus of that dispute was When CIVIX later chose to sue MLSs (e.g., CIVIX-DDI vs. MRED and CIVIX-DDI vs. MRIS), it was for alleged infringements unrelated to and therefore the earlier settlement did not apply.”

This raises more than a few questions…

From → News

One Comment
  1. So what was the point of this email from MOVE? To clarify to VA readers the Move/NAR/ corporate structure? Or was it to embarrass Robert for his error? I know 799,990 REALTOR’s that don’t understand the NAR/ structure (nor do they even care). We’re just a little vendor trying to do the right thing; save our industry (and lots of others) from spending millions settling this bogus lawsuit as well as another similar suit that will be coming down the pike real soon. I’m not sure why the paragraph above was written and sent to you Greg, but it certainly took the light off of Robert’s very important prior art discoveries….for about 3 seconds.
    Keep up the great work Greg. You are a Vendor Ally.

Comments are closed.