• catloaf@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    10 months ago

    If they can show collusion amongst landlords in the form of them all agreeing to use software like rentmaximizer, yes. But if individual landlords see an ad for rentmaximizer, or even hear about it through word of mouth, and decide to use it on their own, not via a shared agreement with other landlords, then it’s not collusion.

    • phdepressed
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      That type of direct agreement is not necessary to prove collusion (makes it easier to prosecute certainly) but intent doesn’t matter legally. Using a software that has an inbuilt collusion algorithm is still collusion. This is also on a larger scale than mom+pop these algorithms and software were/are used by much larger companies that own magnitudes more units.

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Their stance is “if it’s illegal for a person to do it, it’s illegal for an algorithm to do it”

      If you use a 3rd party to collude, that’s still collusion. Here, that algorithm is the third party

    • Wooster@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      The joint legal brief clarifies that it is indeed collusion. And continues to explain how this is a technological evolution of the handshake.

    • DominusOfMegadeus
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Interesting. To my non-lawyer mind, use of these types of algorithms is collusion by definition.