Less
than
a
week
after


Move
filed
an
amended

motion
for
a
preliminary
injunction
in
its
ongoing
lawsuit
against


CoStar,
the
commercial
listing
giant
has
shot
back.

In
a
brief
filed
on
Wednesday,
CoStar
claims
Move
is
seeking
the
injunction
because
Move’s


Realtor.com
is

losing
market
share
to
CoStar’s


Homes.com.
This
comes
after
Move
revealed
that
James
Kaminsky,
the
former
Move
employee
and
current
CoStar
employee
at
the
center
of
the
legal
battle,
allegedly
accessed
40
stolen
documents.

“As
confirmed
by
Kaminsky’s
testimony,
Move’s
CEO
considers
CoStar
an
’existential
threat.’
Rather
than
compete
on
the
merits,
Move
is
weaponizing
litigation
to
wage
a
PR
campaign
against
a
rival
that
is
accelerating
past
Move
in
the
marketplace,”
the
filing
stated.
“That
Move’s
desperate
times
have
given
rise
to
such
desperate
measures
does
not
warrant
injunctive
relief.”



According
to
CoStar,
Move’s
motion
for
a
preliminary
injunction
is
unreasonable
because
Kaminsky
“minimally
accessed
five
unsecured
documents
related
to
Move’s
’News
and
Insights’
business
after
he
was
laid
off
by
Move.”

In
the
filing
and
in
declarations
from
forensic
experts,
CoStar
states
that
Kaminsky
never
had
the
documents
in
question
in
his
CoStar
account
and
that
they
were
never
sent
to
anyone
at
CoStar.

The
defendant
also
notes
that
Move
has
been
unable
to
show
that
Kaminsky
accessed
the
documents
on
behalf
of
CoStar
or
that
CoStar
knew
of
his
access
to
the
documents.

According
to
declarations
made
by
Kaminsky,
he
accessed
the
documents
in
question
“in
January
and
February
to
aid
in
his
job
search
after
Move
laid
him
off.”
He
did
so
again
“in
March
and
April
to
enable
him
to
contact
certain
former
Move
colleagues
after he
started
with
CoStar,
and
briefly
between
May
31st
and
June
3rd
when
he
was
browsing
files
in
connection
with
a
personal
tax
issue.”

Additionally,
CoStar
claims
that
“Move
cannot
identify
any
change
CoStar
has
made
to
its
business
or
damage
it
has
suffered
as
a
result
of
Kaminsky’s
access
to
the
five
Move
documents.”

The
filing
also
alleges
that
Move
did
not
treat
its
discovery
of
Kaminsky’s
access
to
these
documents
with
the
sense
of
urgency
it
is
deploying
in
its
motion
for
preliminary
injunction,
as
Move
waited
a
month
after
discovering
Kaminsky’s
access
before

filing
its
lawsuit.

CoStar
also
took
issue
with
Move’s
refusal
to
engage
in
an
expedited
discovery,
which
CoStar
claims
would
have
“underscored
what
Kaminsky
told
several
colleagues
at
Move,
including
two
managers,
months
ago:
he
is
not
working
on,
assigning,
or
editing
news,
rather,
his
work
involves
editing
articles
regarding
New
York
condos.”

“Instead,
Move
buried
its
head
in
the
sand
—
and
refused
to
take
the
discovery
any
legitimate
trade
secret
plaintiff
would
have
taken
—
because
the
facts
contradicted
the
case
it
was
publicizing
in
the
media,”
the
filing
states. 

The

Andy
Florance-helmed
CoStar
also
claims
that
an
injunction
is
not
necessary
as
“at
a
fundamental
level,
there
is
nothing
to
enjoin:
neither
CoStar
nor
Kaminsky
have
used
or
are
using
Move’s
documents. 

“An
injunction
in
this
case
is
therefore
unnecessary
and
would
only
reward
Move
for
filing
and
publicizing
a
suit
built
on
falsehoods
about
CoStar,”
the
filing
adds.
“CoStar
would
certainly
face
a
hardship
based
on
the
inevitable
publicity
that
would
accompany
an
injunction,
amplified
by
Move’s
continuing
PR
campaign
around
this
lawsuit
(a
campaign
that
has
already
resulted
in
Move
issuing,
and
then
retracting,
a
false
press
statement
about
this
Court’s
views
of
the
case
expressed
during
the
first
hearing).”

In
addition
to
its
reply,
CoStar
also
filed
sealed
declarations
from
forensic
experts,
several
CoStar
employees
who
work
with
Kaminsky
(including
two
supervisors)
and
Kaminsky
himself.

In
a
statement
emailed
to

HousingWire,
CoStar
general
counsel
Gene
Boxer
wrote
that
“Move
has
tried
to
weaponize
litigation
against
CoStar
and
a
former
employee.”
He
called
these
actions
“desperate,”
and
he
recommended
that
Move
instead
focus
its
efforts
on
the

class
action-lawsuit
recently
filed
by
brokers
who
claim
that
Move
and
other
parties
sold
them
fake
leads.

“To
be
clear,
CoStar
has
never
had
interest
in
Realtor.com’s
strategies
or
alleged
trade
secrets,
as
its
’lead
diversion’
tactics
are
anathema
to
Homes.com’s
agent
and
user-friendly
‘your
listing,
your
lead’
model.
Move’s
lawsuit
is
based
on
false,
and
now
shifting,
premises,”
Boxer
wrote.

“To
start,
Move
filed
a
case
accusing
CoStar
of
using
Move
documents
to
build
a
rival
news
business.
This
accusation
was
completely
false,
as
we
said
publicly
at
the
time. Nothing
more
than
a

PR
stunt,“
he
added.
“As
Move
knows,
CoStar
doesn’t
have
any
of
those
documents,
and
certainly
hasn’t
used
them.

“When
we
wrote
to
Move’s
lawyers
threatening
sanctions,
Move
quickly
backpedaled. No
wonder:
making
false
claims
in
federal
court
gives
rise
to
serious
consequences. Move
then
tried
to
salvage
its
case
with
an
even
weaker
new
theory:
admitting
that
—in
fact
—
no
one
at
CoStar
is
using
any
stale
Move
documents,
but
maybe,
just
maybe,
an
employee
who
edits
descriptions
of
New
York
condos
might
use
documents
he
doesn’t
have,
to
do
a
job
he
doesn’t
have:
directing
CoStar’s
search
engine
optimization. 

“This
is
speculative
nonsense. CoStar
has,
and
has
never
had,
access
to
Move’s
five
supposed
trade
secret
documents. Pretending
we
do,
pretending
Kaminsky
has
a
different
job,
and
pretending
that
a
handful
of
stale
and
unsecure
Move
documents
are
trade
secrets,
is
the
weakest
case
imaginable.”

Move
told
HousingWire
that
it
does
not
comment
on
pending
litigation.

Related