Slashdot Mirror
Four Dutch Uberpop Taxi Drivers Arrested, Fined
An anonymous reader writes with news that authorities in the Netherlands have arrested four drivers sharing their car for money through the Uberpop app. The drivers were then released with a fine of EUR 4,200 (USD 5,300) each and further threatened with additional fines of EUR 10,000 (USD 12,600) for each time they might be caught doing it again. While similar bullying applied to short rentals of private rooms through sites like Airbnb hasn't had the same success so far the thoughts go to the fined drivers, hoping they won't ever be caught carrying their grandmother to the supermarket then have to explain how they dared. Uber says it will "fully support" the affected drivers."
It's not legal just because you saw it on the internet.
While similar bullying...
Enforcing laws is bullying?
You do realise that the whole reason this is a story at all is because the law is perceived as bad. It's not that people don't know the law; it's that this law is, at best, a bad joke.
What kind of person bills his grandmother for taking her to the supermarket? Jeezz...
Repeat after me: "it's against the law to drive people around for money without the proper credentials".
Your bit about "without proper credentials" makes it sound like all that's needed is for a driver to apply for a license and meet some objective requirements like driving records, vehicle inspections and insurance. If that were the case, you'd have a lot more folks siding with the law.
Instead, in order to pick up a fare in Amsterdam, you need to meet some other arbitrary requirements, chief among them being a member of a TTO ("Regulated Taxi Organization") with at least 100 cars. And to pick up a fare from a taxi stand in Amsterdam, you need a further license -- one given at the discretion of the municipality for "professionalism".
So there we have it -- there's a whole set of common sense regulations that are applied and that anyone can meet based on a set of objective criteria. Then there's another set that got "glued on" which makes no sense at all. So ditch the latter, and soon you'll find there's no reason for uber at all.
[ But hey, at least it's not as bad as the US medallion system ! ]
It's not quite that simple. While the undoubtedly outdated, it doesn't give anybody the right te break it. Also, the anarchy that UberPop proposes would backfire as well, so there's probably some good compromise in there. Of course, this isn't what UberPop wants either because if UberPop drivers lose their advantage, they can't keep up their big price difference and their market would evaporate.
The level of astroturfing for Uber is getting ridiculous. I was sympathetic at first, because I can see how the existing monopolies are bad, but:
a) They aren't even trying to change the laws, they're just ignoring them. There are some laws that are so bad civil disobedience is a valid tactic. This is not one of those laws, and even then, when you do civil disobedience you're supposed to *accept* the legal punishment, because you *did* break the law.
b) They're astroturfing like crazy to frame the debate as "the common man versus the big bad taxi monopolies" when it's really "big international web-based corporation versus big local corporations". I don't care how many times you make sockpuppet comments about it, nobody's getting arrested for driving their grandma to the grocery store. People are getting arrested for running unlicensed taxicabs.
Licensing taxis is a good thing. The current laws may be overly-restrictive to protect existing businesses, but the spirit of the law is good. Uber? You're not. Any sympathy I once had is gone, purely because of your PR tactics. I was already unlikely to be a customer (I *have* my own car), but now I'm definitely not going to.
Because of laws. Just as you can't sell any service without the proper licence and not being the correct legal entity.
See it as selling alcohol in a dry county. Or practicing medicine.
Just because it is your property, it isn't always your rules. It is always "our rules" and the Dutch have tlll now decided against it.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
And frankly I think this is a good thing. Getting in a car with a stranger can be a dangerous act. Knowing that the marked taxi that you are getting in is, most likely, driven by a vetted individual, maintained to at least a minimum standard, fitted with cameras and tracking equipment, all mitigate some of that risk.
I don't care that you can drive your car on the road. Just because you do that doesn't mean you get to be a taxi. You state that being a member of a TTO of 100 or more is arbitrary. I say that it means the government has a single point of inspection and contact to manage a large number of vehicles. As for the professionalism, it is much harder to define. But if you want to be a busker in Brisbane city for example you need a license. There is absolutely no cost in getting that license but you have to do an audition. Basically it is the council deciding are your professional enough, and again no issue from me.
Governments should stay neutral in markets and should not be skewing markets and picking winners and losers by arresting people...
Yeah. Because THIS Is the case for not regulating anything. The market of strangers with unknown criminal backgrounds and unknown levels of insurance being allowed to pick you up on the corner, lock you in a car and take you ‘somewhere’.
There’s way to much regulation in life, but having some government enforced standards HERE is 10000% appropriate. Hey, what happened to your daughter? Oh, she was raped by a guy who picked her up at the airport who affiliated with some website. Yeah, shame. Oh well, at least we’re free!
But that doesn't make it right.
Its what makes society function. Not every "outdated law" can be compared to the civil rights movement. Some bad laws you live with, because the alternative of everyone determining which laws apply to them is called anarchy, and works well for noone.
But that doesn't make it right.
Its what makes society function. Not every "outdated law" can be compared to the civil rights movement. Some bad laws you live with, because the alternative of everyone determining which laws apply to them is called anarchy, and works well for noone.
I think you'll find that most people don't consult "the law" as a benchmark for determining their behavior. Saying that "the law" is what makes "society function" is a classic example of the correlation equals causation logical fallacy. Just because a law prescribes or proscribes a particular behavior, doesn't mean it is the motivating force for undertaking or abstaining from such behavior.
50k found it better than Syria, Somalia, Iraq and other war torn countries they are escaping ;)
It is a bloody insult that you need a permit to drive someone from A to B *IN YOUR OWN PROPERTY*.
Thing is, a taxi is usually treated as a form of public transport. The standard that you the driver and your vehicle are held is consequently that much higher. That's why the regulation exists.
It's bizarre that you conflate the issue with how much tax someone might pay on their wages.