Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 28 OCTOBER 2025

Algorithmic Pricing: First Appellate Decision, Settlement, And New Legislation (Part 2)

The first part of this article discussed the Dai v. SAS Inst. Inc case, where plaintiffs alleged the inference of a horizontal agreement by the group of Hotel Operators using IDeaS's software.

United StatesAntitrust/Competition Law

The first part of this article discussed the Dai v. SAS Inst. Inc case, where plaintiffs alleged the inference of a horizontal agreement by the group of Hotel Operators using IDeaS's software. There, the Northern District of California again confirmed the difficult standard for algorithmic pricing at the motion to dismiss stage. More specifically, the Court highlights (1) how important it is to provide enough facts about the nature of the information shared with the software provider, (2) the way defendants share such information, and (3) to what extent that same information was later commingled and integrated into final pricing recommendations.

In this second article, we dive into the first appellate decision in the US dealing with algorithmic pricing, and the recent Greystar Settlement, where the company agreed to stop using algorithmic pricing tools that rely on non-public data from competitors and to avoid participating in RealPage-hosted meetings with other

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from