Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

leginfo.legislature.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

651–660 of 663 posts

Re: California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

#651

Post by fragmede »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #218
ghaff wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The misrepresentation would seem to be the big thing. Someone, let's call them Joe, publishes a list of restaurants online with links to their menus and offers to deliver for the price of the order with tip plus a $10 delivery fee. And has a clear disclaimer that they're not affiliated with the businesses. That seems pretty unobjectionable. And how would the restaurant even know? [ADDED: Subject of course to any heal…

> And has a clear disclaimer that they're not affiliated with the businesses. This isn’t actually clear. GrubHub’s about page: “ Grubhub is a leading online and mobile food-ordering and delivery marketplace with the largest and most comprehensive network of restaurant partners. ” This tells me as a customer that the restaurant is a consenting partner. This is a lie. EDIT: a commentor below had issue with my use of th…

There's also a matter of SEO. Grubhub is an extremely popular website who's pages will far exceed the restaurant's own webpage's rank, so even when searching for local restaurant store by name, the grubhub page will feature prominently, despite having no relation to the restaurant.

Re: California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

#652

Post by toss1 »

ashtonkem wrote: post #316
wpietri wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> some consumers will still tend to blame Sally's Piping Hot Burgers when their burger arrives soggy and cold A friend who manages an excellent restaurant says that this is indeed a problem. One of their signature dishes is fried chicken, and it is glorious. They optimize everything about the meal with the understanding that it's 15-30 seconds from the kitchen to the table. But those are the wrong choices for 15-30 m…

I’m incredibly perplexed why people do this. Even pre pandemic it was patently obvious to anyone who paid attention that certain foods just don’t deliver well. Before the internet became a thing, the only places that regularly offered delivery were pizza joints and Chinese food, because both of those survive delivery well! I ordered delivery burgers once, from a restaurant close by, and learned my lesson that burgers…

> Why should I blame the restaurant for that?

Of course, you should not and you would not

But, to paraphrase PT Barnum: no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the average populous.

There are a sufficiently large portion of the customer base who either lack the intelligence or just do not care enough to figure out what is the source of the problem, and will happily blame the restaurant, and broadcast that erroneous blame in person and online. More than enough of these to ruin a restaurant's reputation and business.

That is why this law is a good thing.

My product or service, I should have the right to control it's distribution up to and including it's first sale (especially if it is not a commodity).

Re: California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

#653

Post by fblp »

I agree with this law in principle but i hate that it is getting implemented at a state level with specific industry language. Broad federal consumer protection laws could be expanded. For example, misrepresenting an affiliation with a business by omission could be made an offense regardless of the industry. The test would be "would a reasonable person think this (intermediary) is affiliated?". This is inspired by Australian Consumer Law.

Re: California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

#654

Post by curryst »

supernova87a wrote: post #466
say_it_as_it_is wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I buy something from you for $10 and then sell it to someone else for $15, I haven't taken anything away from you. You have your price and I have mine.

Yeah, but if my marked up $15 thing you sell to someone else is crappy because of your handling, and now the customer associates my name with expensive, crappy product, my brand has been spoiled by you.

And yet most people don't struggle to realize that when your UPS chucks your package at your house and it breaks, that's UPS' fault, not whoever you ordered from.

This whole argument revolves around a very uncharitable assumption that people are incredibly stupid and incapable of comprehending that the creation of the food and the delivery of the food are handled by two different parties.

If that's the case, the more important thing to do here is cut off the average person from any financial instruments. They're incapable of assessing a simple two party process, they're certainly incapable of accessing the stock market, and allowing them access is predatory. /s

Re: California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

#655

Post by curryst »

throw_m239339 wrote: post #463
akrymski wrote: post #458

Yet another law to reduce competition in the delivery space and help existing monopolies. I'm sure GrubHub and DoorDash are cheering. Indexing and aggregating data is already covered by numerous laws. If Google can aggregate restaurant listings without permission then why can't others? Linking is ok, showing a call button is ok, but delivering isn't? The law around copyright is clear: you can't copy a restaurants men…

> Why don't restaurants want delivery companies doing this? Why can't delivery services ask for permission before listing food from restaurants first? Why do they feel the need to impersonate restaurants, steal their menu, their trademark while never disclosing to the client that the restaurant has absolutely no part in that deal? Why can't delivery services behave in an ethical fashion that doesn't involve fraud? Wh…

And yet, this is how everything else in the world works.

I'm free to go buy 12 packs of Coke and resell them. I don't have to ask Coke if I can sell their product. I can even drive and deliver them to people if I want.

> Why do they feel the need to impersonate restaurants, steal their menu, their trademark while never disclosing to the client that the restaurant has absolutely no part in that deal?

Steal is a misleading term, as it implies that the restaurant is not able to use that menu. Delivery services are extracting and copying the information in the menu. They don't even show photos of the menu as far as I'm aware.

I don't see anything unethical here. They offer delivery of goods. You pay them, they pay their supplier (the restaurant), and they deliver you the goods. It's not any different than a restaurant, except their service is delivering food instead of converting raw ingredients into food.

If this is really unethical, why aren't we targeting drop shippers? They're even worse, they actually rebrand the goods so you can't tell who actually manufactured it. They play the exact same role; their only service is providing delivery for goods someone else manufactured.

Re: California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

#656

Post by throw_m239339 »

curryst wrote: post #655
throw_m239339 wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why don't restaurants want delivery companies doing this? Why can't delivery services ask for permission before listing food from restaurants first? Why do they feel the need to impersonate restaurants, steal their menu, their trademark while never disclosing to the client that the restaurant has absolutely no part in that deal? Why can't delivery services behave in an ethical fashion that doesn't involve fraud? Wh…

And yet, this is how everything else in the world works. I'm free to go buy 12 packs of Coke and resell them. I don't have to ask Coke if I can sell their product. I can even drive and deliver them to people if I want. > Why do they feel the need to impersonate restaurants, steal their menu, their trademark while never disclosing to the client that the restaurant has absolutely no part in that deal? Steal is a mislea…

> I'm free to go buy 12 packs of Coke and resell them.

12 packs of Coke isn't prepared food.

That's the difference between you buying and selling cans of Coke and DoorDash reselling some sushi without the restaurant's approval.

Re: California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

#657

Post by ashtonkem »

saagarjha wrote: post #641
ashtonkem wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny fact, one of the best deliveries I’ve gotten this year was ice cream. The local creamery[0] has an option to sign up for weekly deliveries. They obviously bring the equipment to keep it properly frozen (easier than a milkshake I know), and check IDs for their alcoholic ice creams. I suspect that if they wanted to, they could have pulled off milkshake deliveries, although the logistics wouldn’t scale. 0 - https:…

TIL alcoholic ice cream is a thing.

And it is awesome.

There’s not really enough alcohol in there to affect you; probably because it would eventually hamper the formation of ice. But having ice cream that actually tastes like coffee and bailey’s is the best.

Re: California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

#658

Post by maya24 »

cannaceo wrote: post #627
sandworm101 wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> were pizza joints and Chinese food Don't forget indian food. Much of that cuisine was specifically developed for delivery. The multitude of cultures and eating habits (vegetation, Muslim etc) in modernizing india meant that housewives would prepare hot lunches for their husbands away at work, food which was delivered by the famed Dabbawala network. Some modern restaurants are so proud of this that they deliver foo…

Amusingly, Indian food isn’t well suited for restaurant-style eating. The meal prep takes too long forcing restaurants to cut corners. It only works well with a limited, set menu.

Restaurant indian food is made in batch though. The food tastes just as fresh and often tastes better after the spices have had time to settle.

Re: California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

#659

Post by SOLAR_FIELDS »

derefr wrote: post #603
SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A local (actual, not American) Chinese joint makes by far the best soup dumplings in town. During the pandemic they’ve understandably switched to takeout only, but now their reviews are filled with people that are disappointed by dumplings that aren’t steaming hot inside and have holes because they stick to the takeout containers. I feel really bad for the owners - they’re forced to choose between endangering the liv…

> because they stick to the takeout containers Technological solution: some sort of return-for-deposit Teflon-walled thermos. Only available for regular customers, of course.

I miss getting those soup dumplings hot and fresh so much that I would unironically pay for this in a heartbeat if it worked.
Post reply on HN