Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#41

Post by gsnedders » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:03 PM UTC

friedman23 wrote: post #31

celticninja wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not anti American though, it just so happens that US firms are the first of these types of companies. The rulings that are set apply to all companies equally so Chinese and European firms are bound by the same rules.

My comment was less about this specific ruling and more about the trend. In the US, uber was practically illegal just like Europe. The US made it legal (or looked the other way) while Europe (and much of the rest of the world) decided to clamp down on the service with regulations without ever reflecting on whether the laws themselves were beneficial in the first place. At least in the US, much of the fear mongering o…

Note there's all kinds of regulations affecting taxis in Europe: some have clamped down heavily, and others Uber operates totally above the law in.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#42

Post by will_brown » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:04 PM UTC

friedman23 wrote: post #13

What is the saying, "Cutting off the nose to spite the face"? As Europe continues to add laws and regulations targeted at American tech companies they will further prevent any innovative businesses from growing and thriving in Europe. Also before you respond, I am really not interested in legalist arguments, especially when the laws themselves were designed by and for entrenched interests. It's been 17 years since th…

As a member of the tech/HN community it's very easy to take your position about laws benefiting the entrenched market incumbents, but you can't ignore tech has those very same lobbying/legal protections.

For example, take the New York market with the limited number of taxi medallions, prior to Uber there was stricter regulation and enforcement against individual drivers illegally operating rides for hire. Though when Uber comes along they facilitate these types of illegal ride for hire operations all over the country, even in many jurisdictions where Uber drivers are arrested for illegal operations Uber itself never has to answer for their roll they simply pay a lawyer of their choice to represent the drivers in these cases in order to protect Uber's interest not the driver.

Apply the same organization to any other illegal activity (drugs, prostitution, etc...) it becomes clear very quick Uber has been legally protected even though their driver continue(d) collecting fines and arrests.

And all these great US internet companies you speak of I'm pretty sure are global companies and have global headquarters in Europe (Ireland) specifically in order to avoid pay US taxes, but again are protected by laws designed to protect their entrenched interests.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#43

Post by the_mitsuhiko » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:05 PM UTC

friedman23 wrote: post #31

celticninja wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not anti American though, it just so happens that US firms are the first of these types of companies. The rulings that are set apply to all companies equally so Chinese and European firms are bound by the same rules.

My comment was less about this specific ruling and more about the trend. In the US, uber was practically illegal just like Europe. The US made it legal (or looked the other way) while Europe (and much of the rest of the world) decided to clamp down on the service with regulations without ever reflecting on whether the laws themselves were beneficial in the first place. At least in the US, much of the fear mongering o…

It just depends on how the company deals with it. AirBnB for instance is working with regulators which cannot be said about Uber.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#44

Post by fpgaminer » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:06 PM UTC

k-mcgrady wrote: post #10

CamperBob2 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you own taxi medallions, I don't really see much cause for celebration. Unnecessary regulation is unnecessary. Edit: due to aggressive rate limiting on HN's part, I'm not able to respond to those who have chosen to reply rather than downvote. What I'd say in such a reply is this: despite all of the advantages of regulated taxi services that people are citing, rideshare services are still winning in the marketp…

Taxi drivers in my European country are subject to some requirements that make a lot of sense and help keep people safe. I've user Uber a lot and it's great but anything to up the quality of drivers is good. I've been down one way streets multiple times in Uber's, I've been in multiple near-misses, I've never had these things happen to me in taxi's. Not all taxi drivers are great either but the even the bad ones are…

> I've been down one way streets multiple times in Uber's, I've been in multiple near-misses

What exactly is it about a taxi license that would affect that behavior? And shouldn't those regulations apply to _every_ driver?

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#45

Post by collyw » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:07 PM UTC

friedman23 wrote: post #13

What is the saying, "Cutting off the nose to spite the face"? As Europe continues to add laws and regulations targeted at American tech companies they will further prevent any innovative businesses from growing and thriving in Europe. Also before you respond, I am really not interested in legalist arguments, especially when the laws themselves were designed by and for entrenched interests. It's been 17 years since th…

http://tech.eu/features/186/ignorance-is-remiss/

MySQL is another one not on that list but I guess thats because Oracle bought them over.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#46

Post by stale2002 » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:08 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #42

friedman23 wrote: post #13

What is the saying, "Cutting off the nose to spite the face"? As Europe continues to add laws and regulations targeted at American tech companies they will further prevent any innovative businesses from growing and thriving in Europe. Also before you respond, I am really not interested in legalist arguments, especially when the laws themselves were designed by and for entrenched interests. It's been 17 years since th…

As a member of the tech/HN community it's very easy to take your position about laws benefiting the entrenched market incumbents, but you can't ignore tech has those very same lobbying/legal protections. For example, take the New York market with the limited number of taxi medallions, prior to Uber there was stricter regulation and enforcement against individual drivers illegally operating rides for hire. Though when…

The USA has some of the same regulations, sure, but when it became clear that they were outdated, most cities got rid of them.

You can get an uber in any major city in the USA, now.

The best way to get rid of bad laws is to break them.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#47

Post by gsnedders » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:08 PM UTC

orf wrote: post #19

Shivetya wrote: post #2

so can anyone speak to what it entails to gain a taxi license? is this a burdensome requirement on those who want to drive? I have no issue with requiring specific insurance as anyone driving for any ride share service is just risking too much without proper coverage. in the US far too much occupational regulation/licensing only serves now to protect current providers effectively locking out or deterring competition.

In London they have to pass a test called "the knowledge"[1]. It's the "hardest taxi test in the world" and quite impressive. It ensures taxi drivers actually know what they are doing and where they are going, not just blindly following their GPS. > To become an All-London taxi driver or Green badge holder you need to master no fewer than 320 basic routes, all of the 25,000 streets that are scattered within the basic…

That is, however, a requirement for taxi drivers only (who can be hailed and pick up people off the street), but not for private hire drivers (who must be prebooked through a booking office). It is, perhaps, the most notable difference.

London has more stringent requirements for private hires than much of the UK (especially relating to pollution), but ultimately most of the requirements essentially relate to equipment (pollution standards for the car, fire extinguisher, first aid kit, etc.) which while they form a cost to entry are nothing compared with a multi-year effort to learn a large part of London, or the tens/hundreds of thousands that medallions cost in many places.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#48

Post by gsnedders » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:10 PM UTC

celticninja wrote: post #22

gsnedders wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends massively between EU states. Some it's relatively easy [edit: to operate as a "taxi" in a general sense, rather than the legal term], such as in the UK (pass a prolonged driving test, have commercial insurance, review of any criminal record as to whether they pose a threat to the public, though there's some variety between councils who are the licensing body especially when it comes to vehicles and equipment)…

Although it is not entirely that easy in the UK, if you want to be a London black can driver then it is very difficult, as well as what you already mentioned there is also "the knowledge" exam that must be passed. Which is quite possibly one of the toughest assignments I have ever witnessed.

Well, I was really referring to private hires here, given Uber Britannia operate as a private hire company, and private hires don't have any such requirement anywhere in the UK.

Another difference taxis tend to have specific whitelisted vehicles (hence the iconic image of a black hackney cab), whereas private hires generally just need to meet some list of requirements (typically something along the lines of having at least four doors, seating at least four, etc.).

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#49

Post by gsnedders » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:11 PM UTC

fiatjaf wrote: post #11

Shivetya wrote: post #2

so can anyone speak to what it entails to gain a taxi license? is this a burdensome requirement on those who want to drive? I have no issue with requiring specific insurance as anyone driving for any ride share service is just risking too much without proper coverage. in the US far too much occupational regulation/licensing only serves now to protect current providers effectively locking out or deterring competition.

Burdensome? Taxi licenses are limited so taxi drivers can keep their cartel against the entry of competitors. It is impossible unless you're politically connected. That's why Uber is so great: it is destroying this stupidity.

Not everywhere in Europe has limits on the number of taxi licenses.

Re: Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case

#50

Post by stale2002 » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 10:11 PM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #38

ballenf wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True: it's just anti-progress or at least anti-anything-that-doesn't-fit-a-hundred-plus-year-old-notion-of-how-things-should-work.

anti-worker, anti-customer, anti-morals. Let Uber die by a thousand cuts.

Pro-consumer.

Consumers overwhelming support ridesharing because of how cheap it is.

Also, if a consumer doesn't like these service, they are free to use any number of other transportation services.

That is what this fight is about. Letting consumers decide for themselves which services they prefer.