114 年 國立臺灣大學經濟學系碩士班《專業英文（D）》
第 1 題5 分
According to Article 1, what is the primary accusation against RealPage by the Department of Justice (DOJ)?
(A) Selling data to third-party advertisers.
(B) Using an algorithm to illegally coordinate rent prices
(C) Overcharging landlords for software.
(D) Underpricing rental units to increase market share
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
這題考查對 Article 1 中，美國司法部 (DOJ) 對 RealPage 的主要指控的理解。文章開頭即點出，司法部對 RealPage 提起的民事訴訟，指控該公司利用其軟體，透過抑制市場競爭，人為地抬高全美租金價格。具體來說，該軟體利用房東提供的非公開數據，訓練其定價演算法，從而創造了一個「顛覆競爭過程的龐大計畫」。
第 2 題5 分
According to Article 1, which type of landlords primarily uses RealPage's software?
(A) Individual property owners
(B) Government housing agencies
(C) Corporate landlords with large rental portfolios
(D) Small, family-owned rental businesses
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
此題要求根據 Article 1，判斷哪一類型的房東主要使用 RealPage 的軟體。文章中提到，司法部的訴訟發生在「企業房東數量不斷增加」的背景下，這些公司擁有大量的出租單位。文章引述一位官員的話：「我們腦海中不會離題太遠，這種串通行為發生在企業房東集中的背景下…當房東是企業房東時，他們有能力使用這種軟體，人們被驅逐的比率更高。
第 3 題5 分
According to Article 2, what percentage of the rental software market does RealPage reportedly control?
(A) 50%
(B) 70%
(C) 80%
(D) 90%
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
本題要求根據 Article 2，指出 RealPage 在租賃軟體市場中據稱佔有多少百分比的市佔率。
第 4 題5 分
According to the articles, what legal distinction makes the RealPage case significant for the DOJ?
(A) It is the first case involving a private company in the rental housing industry.
(B) It is the first civil case where an algorithm is claimed to have violated antitrust law.
(C) It involves the largest fine in antitrust history.
(D) It is the first time the DOJ has targeted the use of sensitive data.
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
本題要求根據文章內容，指出 RealPage 案件對 DOJ 而言有何法律上的獨特性，使其顯得重要。Article 2 中提到：「這也是 DOJ 的首次嘗試，據官員在討論該案的電話會議中透露。雖然政府先前曾對一位亞馬遜賣家提起刑事訴訟，指控其透過演算法操縱價格，但這是 DOJ 首次提起民事訴訟，其中演算法本身被 DOJ 官員認為是違法的手段。」這段話清楚地說明了此案的獨特性。
第 5 題10 分
For the following questions, consider each of the choices separately and select all that apply:
5. (10%) According to the DOJ's lawsuit, what practices of RealPage are deemed problematic?
a. Using sensitive, confidential data for rent pricing.
b. Setting rental prices based on tenant input.
c. Actively enforcing landlords' compliance with its pricing recommendations.
d. Providing landlords with inaccurate market information.
e. Creating a feedback loop that reinforces higher rent prices.
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
此題為多選題，要求根據 DOJ 的訴訟內容，選出 RealPage 被認為有問題的做法。我們逐一檢視各選項：
(a) 使用敏感、機密數據進行租金定價：Article 1 和 Article 2 都明確指出，RealPage 使用房東提供的「非公開數據」(nonpublic data) 或「機密、具競爭敏感性的資訊」(confidential, competitively sensitive information) 來訓練其演算法，並據此提出定價建議。這被 DOJ 視為問題所在。
(b) 根據租戶輸入設定租金價格：文章中沒有任何地方提到 RealPage 的軟體是根據租戶的輸入來設定租金價格。
第 6 題10 分
For the following questions, consider each of the choices separately and select all that apply:
6. (10%) According to the articles, what are the effects of RealPage's pricing algorithm on the rental housing market?
a. It increases landlords' pricing power.
b. It improves renters' access to affordable housing.
c. It encourages landlords to lower rents in competitive areas.
d. It limits competition among landlords.
e. It exclusively increases rent prices.
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
此題為多選題，要求根據文章內容，選出 RealPage 的定價演算法對租賃住房市場產生的影響。
(a) 增加房東的定價權力 (It increases landlords' pricing power)：Article 2 的 DOJ 發布會新聞稿中提到，「RealPage 的軟體傾向於最大化價格上漲，最小化價格下跌，並最大化房東的定價權力」(RealPage's software tends to maximize price increases, minimize price decreases, and maximize landlords' pricing power)。這直接支持此選項。
(b) 改善租戶獲得可負擔住房的機會 (It improves renters' access to affordable housing)：文章的整體基調是 RealPage 的行為導致租金上漲，這與改善可負擔住房的機會是相反的。DOJ 的官員甚至提到，當房東是企業房東時，人們被驅逐的比率更高。因此，此選項不正確。
(c) 鼓勵房東在競爭激烈的地區降低租金 (It encourages landlords to lower rents in competitive areas)：文章指出，RealPage 的軟體是為了「最大化房東的定價權力」，並幫助房東「協調租金」，這與在競爭地區降低租金的行為是相反的。
(d) 限制了房東之間的競爭 (It limits competition among landlords)：Article 1 提到，在自由市場中，房東「本應獨立競爭以吸引租戶」，但 RealPage 的軟體透過讓房東分享機密資訊並協調租金，實際上「抑制了市場競爭」(quell
第 Problem 7 題
Part II (60%): Analytical Writing (分析寫作;作答於試卷內之「非選擇題作答區」)
Read the following article, and then plan and compose a response to the particular issue below. Responding to any other issue will receive a score of zero. Be sure to respond according to the specific instructions and support your position on the issue with reasons and examples drawn from such areas as your reading, experience, observations, and/or academic studies.
Article 3: Excerpts of "Is this algorithm driving your rent higher?" by Whizy Kim, Vox, September 6, 2024.
Today, algorithms rule everything around us. They serve us entertaining, or at least addictive, content on social media. They try to suss out which emails in our overstoxxed inboxes might be most important, and which ones are spam. They act as matchmakers for our love lives. Increasingly, though, algorithms have also been deployed by companies, from Amazon to Uber to Wendy's, to figure out optimal-often higher-prices that can shift automatically based on a firehose of fine-grained data. Including, apparently, your rent.
Now, a software company called RealPage is being sued by the Department of Justice for using an algorithm that suggests rent prices to corporate landlords. The DOJ argues that its algorithm has driven rents higher, and constitutes an illegal information sharing scheme. That is, competitors (the landlords) who would otherwise be acting independently, have exchanged "nonpublic, competitively sensitive data" to the detriment of renters who don't have access to such knowledge.
A 2020 ProPublica investigation quoted Andrew Bowen, then a RealPage executive, admitting that the software had probably driven up rental prices. "As a property manager, very few of us would be willing to actually raise rents double digits within a single month by doing it manually," he said. In the DOJ's complaint, one unnamed landlord is quoted praising a RealPage product as "classic price fixing" ... (omitted). Vox spoke to Christopher L. Sagers, a law professor at Cleveland State University, on why pricing algorithms are under scrutiny now and how likely it is for the DOJ to win this case.
What is the part of what RealPage and its software does that the DOJ is saying violates antitrust law?
I think the relatively simple answer is (that) they do a few things with this data that cause them to be doing more than just providing information or helping landlords make decisions. Most importantly, they are using confidential data not available to renters. They're only available to one side of the market. They are then using that data to make mere recommendations. In other words, they're making forward-looking future predictions of what the best price will be from the landlord's perspective.
What do you think RealPage's main defense will be?
Their main defense is going to be that they are simply helping landlords do something that landlords could have done themselves, and if the landlords did it, it would all have been been legal. That's a general point they will make. A closely related point is, they're going to say this isn't price fixing; this is just sharing of information. And as everybody knows who's taken freshman economics, information is good for markets, right? Competitive markets have to have good information or they don't work well. So we're really just doing this to have a vibrant, competitive marketplace.
Based on the DOJ complaint and other reporting, do you think it's likely that RealPage helped drive up rents?
I think it's very likely. This isn't just a big conspiracy in that it involves a lot of units; they also have very substantial market penetration. Among landlords of a certain size, a very large percentage of them are using not just a product like this; they're using RealPage. The complaint contains a bunch of evidence that the landlords know who else in their market is using RealPage, and they call each other and ask. The reason that's so significant is, if you know that your three competitors are all using the same software that you use for any competitive purposes, then you know there's no real risk to you in raising your prices, right? So the idea that this isn't raising prices in real markets seems very unlikely to me. (omitted)...
If the DOJ wins this case, what does that change for digital pricing tools in general?
(omitted)... I have reason to believe that this particular technology has had a huge impact on consumer prices throughout the economy. If RealPage is found to have violated the law, it will at least have repercussions throughout the tech sector. This is a big tech product category, right? It's something antitrust watchers have been thinking about for a long time: When can an algorithm itself be illegal, and when is an algorithm effectively price fixing?
Digital pricing tools like those used by RealPage contribute to inflation and undermine market
competition and fairness.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with this
claim AND provide reasons and evidence to support your position.
You should write no less than 300 words, but no more than 1000 words. Your response will be evaluated for its overall quality
based on how well you:
• Respond to the specific task instructions
• Consider the complexities of the issue
• Organize, develop, and express your ideas
• Support your ideas with relevant reasons and/or examples
• Control the elements of standard written English
Before beginning writing, you may want to think for a few minutes and then plan your response. Use the bottom of this page
to plan your response, and then write your response in the answer sheets (試卷內之「非選擇題作答區」). Be sure to
develop your positions completely and organize it coherently, but spare some time to proof-read what you have written to
make any revisions you deem necessary.
Plan Your Response Here. Write Your Essay in the Answer Sheets (試卷內之「非選擇題作答區」)
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
此題為分析寫作題，要求考生閱讀 Article 3，並針對「數位定價工具，如 RealPage 所使用的，會導致通貨膨膨脹並破壞市場競爭與公平性」這個主張，討論同意或不同意的程度，並提供理由和證據支持。
這是一個開放性的寫作題，沒有標準答案，但評分會基於以下幾點：
- 對任務說明的回應程度：是否準確理解題目要求，並針對「數位定價工具與通貨膨脹、市場競爭及公平性」的關係進行論述。
- 考慮問題的複雜性：是否能看到這個問題的多面向，例如數位工具的優勢與劣勢、演算法的合法性界線、以及其對不同市場參與者（房東、租戶、消費者、科技公司）的影響。
- 組織、發展與表達想法：文章結構是否清晰，論點是否連貫，論述是否深入。
- 用相關理由和/或例子支持想法：是否能引用文章內容、課堂知識、個人經驗或學術研究來支持論點。
- 標準英文的掌握：語法、拼寫、標點、詞彙使用是否正確。
寫作提示與建議：
- 理解核心主張：題目主張數位定價工具（以 RealPage 為例）會導致通貨膨脹，並破壞市場競爭與公平性。
- 分析 RealPage 的案例：
- DOJ 的指控：RealPage 使用房東的機密數據，透過演算法協調租金，人為抬高價格，這構成非法資訊共享和價格操縱，違反反壟斷法。
- RealPage 的潛在辯護：聲稱只是提供資訊，幫助房東做他們自己也能做的合法決策，促進市場資訊流通，從而使市場更具活力。
- 文章觀點：作者認為 RealPage 很可能確實推高了租金，因為房東知道競爭對手也在使用相同軟體，降低了漲價風險。並指出這類技術對整體經濟的影響，以及演算法是否違法的長期討論。
- 支持或反駁主張：
- 同意此主張的論點：
- 通貨膨脹：如 Article 3 所述，這類工具「傾向於最大化價格上漲」，當市場上大量參與者使用類似工具，且這些工具的設計目標是最大化利潤時，整體價格水平就可能被推高，這與通貨膨脹的現象一致。
- 破壞市場競爭：如 Article 1 和 3 所述，演算法利用機密數據，使競爭者之間能夠「協調」價格，而不是獨立競爭。這實際上是古典經濟學中「卡特爾」(cartel) 行為的數位化變體，嚴重削弱了價格競爭。
- 破壞市場公平性：租戶（消費者）無法獲得與房東（賣方）相同的資訊，處於資訊不對稱的劣勢，無法有效判斷價格是否合理，這是不公平的。
- 不同意此主張（或認為情況更複雜）的論點：
- 效率提升：演算法可以更精確地反映市場供需，使資源配置更有效率。例如，動態定價可以更好地匹配需求高峰和低谷。
- 資訊的正面作用：正如 RealPage 可能辯稱的，良好的市場資訊有助於市場有效運行。問題在於資訊的「使用方式」和「來源」。
- 責任歸屬：問題可能不在於演算法本身，而在於使用演算法的企業，以及現有反壟斷法的適用範圍是否足夠。
- 「僅僅」是通膨和破壞公平：可能存在其他導致通膨和市場不公的因素，演算法只是其中一個環節，或者其影響被誇大了。
- 同意此主張的論點：
- 結構安排：
- 引言：簡述文章背景，提出自己的立場（同意、不同意或部分同意）。
- 主體段落 1：論述同意主張的理由（例如，演算法如何導致價格上漲和競爭減少），引用文章證據。
- 主體段落 2：論述同意主張的理由（例如，演算法如何破壞公平性），引用文章證據或類比。
- 主體段落 3 (可選)：提出不同意（或認為情況複雜）的觀點，或者探討演算法的潛在益處，以及責任歸屬的問題。
- 結論：重申立場，總結論點，並可對未來提出展望。
- 字數要求：不少於 300 字，不超過 1000 字。
範例回答架構（同意立場）：
第 Problem 8 題
Based on the DOJ complaint and other reporting, do you think it's likely that RealPage helped drive up rents?
I think it's very likely. This isn't just a big conspiracy in that it involves a lot of units; they also have very substantial market
penetration. Among landlords of a certain size, a very large percentage of them are using not just a product like this; they're
using RealPage. The complaint contains a bunch of evidence that the landlords know who else in their market is using
RealPage, and they call each other and ask. The reason that's so significant is, if you know that your three competitors are all
using the same software that you use for any competitive purposes, then you know there's no real risk to you in raising your
prices, right? So the idea that this isn't raising prices in real markets seems very unlikely to me. (omitted)...
If the DOJ wins this case, what does that change for digital pricing tools in general?
(omitted)... I have reason to believe that this particular technology has had a huge impact on consumer prices throughout the
economy. If RealPage is found to have violated the law, it will at least have repercussions throughout the tech sector. This is a
big tech product category, right? It's something antitrust watchers have been thinking about for a long time: When can an
algorithm itself be illegal, and when is an algorithm effectively price fixing?
Digital pricing tools like those used by RealPage contribute to inflation and undermine market
competition and fairness.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with this
claim AND provide reasons and evidence to support your position.
You should write no less than 300 words, but no more than 1000 words. Your response will be evaluated for its overall quality
based on how well you:
• Respond to the specific task instructions
• Consider the complexities of the issue
• Organize, develop, and express your ideas
• Support your ideas with relevant reasons and/or examples
• Control the elements of standard written English
Before beginning writing, you may want to think for a few minutes and then plan your response. Use the bottom of this page
to plan your response, and then write your response in the answer sheets (試卷內之「非選擇題作答區」). Be sure to
develop your positions completely and organize it coherently, but spare some time to proof-read what you have written to
make any revisions you deem necessary.
Plan Your Response Here. Write Your Essay in the Answer Sheets (試卷內之「非選擇題作答區」)
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
此題為分析寫作題，要求考生閱讀 Article 3 的內容，並針對「數位定價工具，如 RealPage 所使用的，會導致通貨膨脹並破壞市場競爭與公平性」這個主張，討論同意或不同意的程度，並提供理由和證據支持。
請注意： 題目 8 的內容與題目 7 的寫作提示完全相同，只是在題目 7 的部分，先提供了文章的訪談內容，並要求回答「RealPage 和其軟體做了什麼事，是 DOJ 認為違反反壟斷法的？」以及「你認為 RealPage 的主要辯護會是什麼？」和「你認為 RealPage 幫助推高租金的可能性有多大？」，最後才引導到寫作題。而題目 8 直接跳到了寫作題。這表示考生需要將前面訪談內容的重點，融入到寫作題的論述中。
核心要點與寫作方向（與題目 7 類似，但需融入更具體的細節）：
-
RealPage 的行為如何違反反壟斷法：
- 使用房東的「機密、具競爭敏感性的數據」(confidential, competitively sensitive data)。
- 這些數據「非房客所能取得」(not available to renters)，僅單方面提供給房東（市場的一方）。
- 利用這些數據進行「前瞻性的未來預測」(forward-looking future predictions)，不僅僅是建議，而是實質上協調租金。
- 「積極執行房東遵守定價建議」(actively polices landlords' compliance)。
- DOJ 官員認為演算法本身成為了違法的手段。
- 有房東稱讚其產品為「經典的價格操縱」(classic price fixing)。
-
RealPage 的潛在辯護：
- 只是幫助房東做他們自己也能做的合法事情。
- 這不是價格操縱，而是「資訊共享」(sharing of information)。
- 良好的市場資訊有助於「充滿活力的競爭市場」(vibrant, competitive marketplace)。
-
RealPage 推高租金的可能性：
- 「非常有可能」(very likely)。
- 原因：市場滲透率高，許多房東使用；房東知道競爭對手也在用，降低了漲價的風險。
-
數位定價工具對整體經濟的影響：
- 對「消費者價格」(consumer prices) 產生了巨大的影響。