At a pivotal juncture for the multiple listing service (MLS), Hive MLS CEO Daniel Jones has put forward a new Declaration of MLS Stewardship Principles—a proposed “MLS constitution” aimed at setting a foundational framework for the role of an MLS, its protections, and its responsibilities as the real estate market continues to evolve.
This declaration comes as MLS leaders grapple with critical issues such as private listing approaches, cooperation, public marketing, data ownership, licensing, artificial intelligence (AI), industry consolidation, and the changing function of the MLS.
Jones spoke with HousingWire to clarify the difference between stewarding the marketplace and owning it, discuss how MLSs can effectively balance cooperation with broker business models, establish boundaries between cooperative and public marketing, and identify the crucial aspects of today’s MLS model that should remain intact.
Editor’s note: This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.
Jonathan Delozier: The declaration emphasizes that the MLS does not own the marketplace; it stewards it. In practical terms, what does that distinction mean for Realtors? Where should the MLS draw the line between ensuring cooperation and allowing brokers to explore new business models?
Daniel Jones: Brokerages have the freedom to operate as they wish and are not obligated to join an MLS. The MLS serves as a steward of the cooperative marketplace. When a broker enters a participant agreement, they agree to cooperate with fellow MLS participants, though they don’t have to include all listings. Ultimately, brokers should adhere to their sellers’ wishes, as long as it aligns with fair housing laws. While some listings may not be in the MLS, we require more data for MLS listings than brokers may prefer to provide—data that buyers and appraisers might need. It’s an ongoing negotiation that requires stewardship.
Delozier: In the debate around private listings, how can an MLS maintain a balance between a seller’s wish for privacy or a brokerage’s marketing approach and the expectation that the MLS offers a comprehensive and reliable overview of inventory?
Jones: The MLS functions like a public ledger, accessible to its participants, but whether that information extends into public marketing channels depends on the brokers’ decisions. The MLS does not operate in the public marketing space, nor should it. If brokers want to keep certain listings private, that choice is theirs. However, the MLS cannot vouch for data quality outside of its cooperative model, where participants can review and correct information. Private listing networks, I believe, echo the original formation of the MLS, which was based on brokerages working together for mutual benefit. I want to be part of encouraging that cooperation.
Delozier: What obligations does an MLS have regarding how its data can be used by AI companies, and what rights should agents and brokers have over their contributed data?
Jones: While the listing remains active, the broker operates under a listing agreement with the seller, meaning the display details are between the broker and the seller. Once a listing is sold, it becomes part of the MLS data compilation. We are responsible for being stewards of that data, ensuring its appropriate usage outside the MLS. We must authorize and license how data is distributed; for instance, brokers may choose to opt out of syndicating their listings to platforms like Realtor.com. MLSs need to respect those preferences.
Delozier: Referring back to your constitution declaration, it distinguishes between the cooperative marketplace and public marketing, asserting that public marketing decisions reflect brokers serving clients. What are the key unresolved questions around that boundary, and what should Realtors monitor regarding related policies?
Jones: I created the constitution due to confusion over status definitions, like “coming soon.” The meaning of these statuses in public marketing has become murky. It is crucial that these statuses serve to inform cooperative participants rather than mixing them with public marketing strategies. There’s too much conflation of public marketing and MLS functions, which leads to confusion. As MLS, I don’t control public marketing, and I need to navigate that carefully while supporting brokerages’ needs.
Delozier: Looking five years ahead, which elements of the current MLS model do you believe must remain unchanged to serve consumers, agents, and brokers effectively? Which aspects need a complete reconsideration?
Jones: Currently, many view the MLS simply as a platform for agents to manage listings. However, the MLS offers more than just tools such as public record searches and forms. The purpose of the constitution was to redefine our identity, emphasizing that Hive MLS is a provider of multiple listing services, not just a technical platform. Over time, I hope people will reconsider these imaginary boundaries and foster relationships with other brokerages. The lessons from today should reinforce the golden rule—treat others as you want to be treated. We need to uphold the cooperative spirit that led to the creation of the MLS, ensuring we don’t lose sight of our purpose as an industry. I believe that if MLSs fail to strengthen relationships across brokerages, they may weaken over time.
