Yes. If they sell them in three months they're using insider information for financial gain. If they live there they could have just been making an early start on finding somewhere convenient to live. Whatever the rules are there's definitely a moral difference.
> But I think insider information is only with respects to stocks.
Technically it's "securities," which is a broader array of financial instruments than stocks. But I'm not sure that real estate, particularly real estate that one might use as a primary residence, is considered a qualifying security with respect to SEC insider trading laws.
1) Trading on "inside knowledge" is not really a crime, or even a problem. Everyone knows something the other doesn't: thats why you trade on it. You sell your knowledge and knowhow.
2) Why do you think the employees of amazon are less entitled to that gain that the landlords or queens that have almost no relationship whatsoever to the company and have somehow a windfall
3) The ultimate loser of not being able to capture the externality value produced is the company, i.e. the shareholders. This is the other side of the coin of when amazon bargains for tax breaks: some people will be made wealthier for a tangential participation.
