Uber Boston Has Been Served • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#11

Post by neilk » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:10 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #4

Two tickets were apparently issued: (i) For operating an unlicensed livery service (ii) For using a non-approved mechanism for metering the ride The C&D at issue here covers (ii). At its heart, the complaint is that Boston has standardized on a way of metering passengers, and Uber has replaced that standard with GPS. Presumably, cab drivers in Boston could not simply choose to replace their meters with GPS monitors,…

I was amazed by this sentence in the C&D:

"Massachusetts law does not sanction unapproved devices for use in commercial transactions."

Does that mean what I think it means? If I use an iPhone app to calculate the tax, and it's not approved, then I broke the law? Does this apply to Square, too? I thought that there was an English common law principle that "Everything which is not forbidden is allowed".

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#12

Post by fxm4139 » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:11 PM UTC

This is especially sad considering a recent cab experience I had in Boston. I lived in Boston for a about 5 years before moving out to Seattle, where I recently started using Uber. Boston has one of the worst cab situations especially if you go out late at night. I was back in Boston a few weeks ago, and ended up running into a few friends and stayed up till 3AM. When it was time to go home, there were either cabs that had passengers, or ones that just didn't want to stop despite waiting for 10 minutes. I pull out the Uber app and get a ride in literally a couple of minutes. My friends hadn't heard of the service and they were just dumbfounded that something like this existed, and they all became customers on the spot.

In Seattle, I use Uber only when I have to since cabs are easy to get. I can't imagine using Uber in Manhattan. But in a city like Boston with a shortage of cabs, and just generally grumpy cab drivers I can imagine Uber was just putting a serious dent in the cab business, more so than other cities.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#13

Post by tptacek » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:14 PM UTC

chimi wrote: post #6

I don't think being a startup should grant you immunity from the law or absolve the requirement to follow local regulations and licensing statutes. Lawyers, doctors, electricians they all have to follow the law too. Why is Uber a special case?

Two reasons (neither dispositive):

(i) The cities in which Uber operates usually have dysfunctional cab systems. San Francisco, for instance, is notoriously underserved.

(ii) Much of the regulatory overhead in running a cab/livery service really is an artifact of top-down market controls from the turn of the last century that have been exploited to lock the market to a privileged few operators.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#14

Post by tptacek » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:15 PM UTC

neilk wrote: post #11

tptacek wrote: post #4

Two tickets were apparently issued: (i) For operating an unlicensed livery service (ii) For using a non-approved mechanism for metering the ride The C&D at issue here covers (ii). At its heart, the complaint is that Boston has standardized on a way of metering passengers, and Uber has replaced that standard with GPS. Presumably, cab drivers in Boston could not simply choose to replace their meters with GPS monitors,…

I was amazed by this sentence in the C&D: "Massachusetts law does not sanction unapproved devices for use in commercial transactions." Does that mean what I think it means? If I use an iPhone app to calculate the tax, and it's not approved, then I broke the law? Does this apply to Square, too? I thought that there was an English common law principle that "Everything which is not forbidden is allowed".

No, I don't think that's what they mean. They're referring to meters.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#15

Post by tptacek » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:16 PM UTC

ktizo wrote: post #8

the Division of Standards is claiming that until the National Institute of Standards and Technology has guidelines in place for GPS location technology Is not as though GPS is some brand new thing that they have never heard of before. This whole tone of this makes me think of Central Services from the movie 'Brazil'. Uber should ask the Division of Standards for a 27b/6, just to keep things official.

That's not what they're saying. They're saying that under MA law, a cab driver couldn't replace their meter with the "equivalent" GPS system, and so neither can Uber.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#16

Post by untog » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:16 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #4

Two tickets were apparently issued: (i) For operating an unlicensed livery service (ii) For using a non-approved mechanism for metering the ride The C&D at issue here covers (ii). At its heart, the complaint is that Boston has standardized on a way of metering passengers, and Uber has replaced that standard with GPS. Presumably, cab drivers in Boston could not simply choose to replace their meters with GPS monitors,…

I'm torn too, but the meter thing is a very sensible point. Taxi meters in NYC (the only market I have experience with) are basically entirely locked boxes- the drivers can't do anything beyond poke the buttons on the front. This is, of course, very sensible- otherwise there's a danger of unscrupulous drivers modifying their meters to charge passengers more. This is only the case for yellow cabs in NYC, though- I'm surprised that Boston expands the principle to private car services.

A lot of government regulation is bad, but not all of it is. AirBnB and hotel regulation is another example of this.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#17

Post by kemiller » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:19 PM UTC

kungfooguru wrote: post #5

jfb wrote: post #2

Oh, the rent-seeking. What are taxi medallions for if not graft and log-rolling?

Traffic and pricing control...

That is true. But it was much more relevant in an age when the rider was more or less at the mercy of the driver who picked them up. The internet on your phone (not to mention the GPS) means you can much more easily tell if you're being cheated. And the fact that you contact Uber and then they send a car means that the sketchy kidnapper risk is mitigated.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#18

Post by chrisdroukas » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:21 PM UTC

neilk wrote: post #11

tptacek wrote: post #4

Two tickets were apparently issued: (i) For operating an unlicensed livery service (ii) For using a non-approved mechanism for metering the ride The C&D at issue here covers (ii). At its heart, the complaint is that Boston has standardized on a way of metering passengers, and Uber has replaced that standard with GPS. Presumably, cab drivers in Boston could not simply choose to replace their meters with GPS monitors,…

I was amazed by this sentence in the C&D: "Massachusetts law does not sanction unapproved devices for use in commercial transactions." Does that mean what I think it means? If I use an iPhone app to calculate the tax, and it's not approved, then I broke the law? Does this apply to Square, too? I thought that there was an English common law principle that "Everything which is not forbidden is allowed".

It seems they're referring specifically to measurement systems, as in a taxi service. The preceding sentence in the ruling is:

"The major problem at this time is the fact that there are no established measurement standards for its current application and use in determining transportation costs similar to that of approved measurement systems for taximeters and odometers."

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#19

Post by schraeds » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:26 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #4

Two tickets were apparently issued: (i) For operating an unlicensed livery service (ii) For using a non-approved mechanism for metering the ride The C&D at issue here covers (ii). At its heart, the complaint is that Boston has standardized on a way of metering passengers, and Uber has replaced that standard with GPS. Presumably, cab drivers in Boston could not simply choose to replace their meters with GPS monitors,…

I have used Uber a few times here in Chicago and after chatting with drivers, I am fairly certain the existing in-cab mater is still used to calculate fare, and is paid for by uber. They are not doing their own metering, the cabs charge the same fee, which is paid for by Uber with a 20% tip.

It was very encouraging to see how enthusiastically the drivers were embracing Uber.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#20

Post by schraeds » Tue, Aug 14, 2012, 9:28 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #15

ktizo wrote: post #8

the Division of Standards is claiming that until the National Institute of Standards and Technology has guidelines in place for GPS location technology Is not as though GPS is some brand new thing that they have never heard of before. This whole tone of this makes me think of Central Services from the movie 'Brazil'. Uber should ask the Division of Standards for a 27b/6, just to keep things official.

That's not what they're saying. They're saying that under MA law, a cab driver couldn't replace their meter with the "equivalent" GPS system, and so neither can Uber.

I know that in Chicago Uber does not replace the meter. The meter is run and used to calculate fare, Uber then pays that fare with a 20% tip.