Slashdot Mirror


City of Toronto Files Court Injunction Against Uber

Sebolains writes: The city of Toronto in Ontario, Canada has filed a court injunction on Uber Canada Inc. today that requests for all operations in the city to cease. Uber has been operating there since 2012 without a license from the city, and so officials are concerned that Uber's operations pose a risk to both drivers and riders. How quickly this will happen, we don't know, but the city has asked the courts to be expedient in hearing this application.

169 comments

  1. Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Amnenth · · Score: 4, Informative

    John Tory (the next mayor of Toronto) has made statements actually supporting Uber. Thing is, although he's been elected he hasn't taken office yet, so he's not quite in a position to act. Be interesting to see what happens when he takes the helm, though.

    1. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Funny

      The current Mayor doesn't support it? You'd think he'd be in favor of anything that would get him home safely from a hard night of drinking and smoking crack cocaine....

      There's Uber's motto: Hey, we've gotta be safer than driving under the influence.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    2. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Pretty much, and everyone already knows why they're trying to expedite it right? Because the city council doesn't want it, but the previous mayor and incoming mayor are in favor of it. For people that don't know, or don't pay attention to the council meetings this should be an eye opener. I don't live in the centre of the universe, but I still get pulled into their gravitational well(130km away).

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by ArcadeMan · · Score: 3, Funny

      There's Uber's motto: Hey, we've gotta be safer than driving under the influence.

      Canadian version: We've gotta be safer than driving under the influence, eh?

    4. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by jonwil · · Score: 1

      Is it the City Council who dont want it? Or is it the Toronto taxi companies lobbying behind the scenes?

    5. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      just wondering a little bit about uber in general,

      How much Operations they have in the city?

      I mean, they don't need to have an office in the city, they don't drive the cars. they don't need to have anything in the city. Has Iran asked Facebook to stop operations in Iran?

      Sure the city can start fining Uber drivers and app users if they want and that would probably be bad for popularity of Uber in Toronto, but what has the service to do with where it's used from?

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It's called regulatory capture. Government initially regulated transportation for hire for legitimate safety reasons; over decades the regulatory agencies set up for this purpose were captured by the status quo. A balance ensued wherein the safety needs are mostly met and the established players don't have to worry about competition. Now there's a disruptive new player that doesn't want to play by the old rules; this annoys the established players along with the self-important bureaucrats that regulate them. Along the way we've lost sight of the legitimate concerns about safety. In the ideal world we would blow up the existing regulatory apparatus and replace it with a leaner version that would focus on the core mission of ensuring safety without interfering with the natural development of the market.

      The same story plays out in a multitude of different markets. George Will writes about it and other examples of crony capitalism/regulatory capture quite frequently. One day a politician will emerge that can actually explain this concept to the masses; this will be a rude surprise for people on both sides of the political aisle who are invested in the status quo. Think of a modern day version of Teddy Roosevelt's trust busting.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    7. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by westlake · · Score: 1

      John Tory (the next mayor of Toronto) has made statements actually supporting Uber.

      But Toronto doesn't have a "strong mayor" like many American cities. What it has is a city manager and a council can go its own way if it chooses.

    8. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Touche. :)

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    9. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by JMJimmy · · Score: 2

      There's Uber's motto: Hey, we've gotta be safer than driving under the influence.

      Problem is that doesn't hold up in Toronto - we have designated driver services for them. I have to say, this is one particular case where I have to side with the city. The reasons they give are reasonable and justified with the exception of the protectionist crap for taxis. The insurance aspect is particularly important - I would not want to be in an accident with someone who only has a million dollars liability that has to cover themselves, the other driver, you, and anyone else injured.

    10. Re: Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear kid,

      Some of us remember history and don't want to repeat it.

      Sincerely, and with no respect for the hipsters sucking at the tit of the billion dollar Uber corporation while pretending it's a new startup,
      AC

    11. Re: Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Toucheh*

    12. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by rossdee · · Score: 1

      "But Toronto doesn't have a "strong mayor" like many American cities."

      But it did have one just as corrupt as any american big city mayor...\

    13. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Do you sue for injuries in Toronto? I thought you had public health care

    14. Re: Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Touché

    15. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just what you won't get with big government. Shitty healthcare, shitty roads and shitty schools are what you'll get. Idiot.

    16. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Is this about automobile safety? Because my car has to pass smog and safety inspection every year just like the cabbies.

    17. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by westlake · · Score: 2

      Nope. That was just the pretext for the power-grab.

      Grow up.

      There is a long, sordid, history of abuses associated with taxi and limousine services, tour buses and so on.

    18. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by thej1nx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Funny.

      But not as funny as pretending that somehow the drivers do NOT have valid driving licenses, or that there are some special inspection requirements that are not required for family cars, but should apply here. This is why lobbying is pure evil.

      What is next? Ban car pooling? Because it is only a matter of time till someone comes up with a popular "couchsurfing/airbnb" version of car pooling, and just generating revenue via registration & background verification fees and advertising.

    19. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      The city council itself mainly doesn't want it. There are some behind the scenes crap without a doubt, but by and far the councilors themselves.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    20. Re: Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoosheh.

    21. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by davester666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, the regulations were initially put in place precisely for the stuff Uber is doing.

      Underinsured drivers [see accidents where Uber drivers are between "jobs", sorry you aren't covered].
      Vehicles not being inspected on a regular basis.
      No ongoing driver checks.
      Overcharging customers.
      Underpaying drivers.

      Then there is the whole death spiral of an unlimited number of drivers all trying to earn a living from a fixed number of clients.

      We have ALREADY gone through "Uber" before [only without the global central computer to maximize fee's and minimize payout]. It is exactly why taxi's are regulated now.

      Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    22. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by dave420 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is a difference between sharing a journey which would happen anyway (and being compensated for fuel used, etc.) and someone actively earning a living from driving people around. If you can't see that maybe you should familiarise yourself with this subject before commenting? I know taxis suck in the US (I have no idea about Canada), but elsewhere they are good, and this Uber nonsense threatens to lower the quality massively, as well as put people at risk.

      There already *are* popular ride-sharing apps & websites out there, and they're perfectly legal, as they are organising ride-sharing, not people pretending to be professional taxis.

    23. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by danielr7z · · Score: 1

      In Madrid (Spain), only a limited number of taxi licenses are available. They can be auctioned (about 200.000$ each). Taxi drivers must own a special driver license (BTP), and comply with several other legal requirements (car aspect and equipment, etc.), so it is in fact a quite regulated maket.

      In my opinion, the general rule should be to require certain controls (driver license, insurance, clear identification, homologated fare meter, etc.) and let the market self regulate. That would exclude "services" like Uber, and allow other services based on car *sharing* (regular commute, etc.): i.e. when driver is doing the trip anyway.

    24. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please don't compare every country to your own. In some countries, people actually respect that the government has set these rules and regulations for safety purposes. So don't get all high and mighty, thinking other societies can't set down their own laws to be followed. I strongly dislike Uber, they're not doing anything new, just ignoring the current laws in "new markets".

    25. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Regulatory capture" is also a convenient label for all government regulation one happens to disagree with. Which, in the case of a right-wing commentator like George Will, is nearly all of it.

    26. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UBER has a solution. Set up its own 'transport' insurance company in hostile countries, and use the American FTA's to sue those countries for trade protection and over-regulation.

      Taxi Cost rankings
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-2685864/Worlds-expensive-city-airport-taxis-revealed-isnt-London-New-York.html

      And in Australia and NZ there a few or no public transport alternatives at low use hours.
      Canberra, Australia's Capital city for instance has no public transport after 8PM on a Sunday!
      40% of the cab fare pays for the license monopoly, a pure tax.
      Regulation ensures passenger safety: NOT
      http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-11/taxi-driver-sentenced-to-jail-for-running-over-passenger/5384694
      http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/six-years-jail-for-taxi-rape-20120315-1v6pt.html

      Bring on Competition.

    27. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Is your car driven by someone with CPR training?
      Is your car driven by someone who has passed a criminal background check?
      Is your car required to have snow tires?
      ...

      It's about more than mere automobile safety.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    28. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Shakrai · · Score: 1

      Yes, and that difference is who is getting paid. That is literally the only difference.

      Have you read through your auto insurance policy? I don't know how Canada works but in the United States it almost certainly contains an exclusion for using your vehicle for hire. Which means if you get into an accident your paying passengers are completely screwed. Does Uber require their drivers to carry livery insurance? Do they verify this so I know you actually have it when you pull up to get me? Do they do background checks on their drivers or am I rolling the dice on climbing into the car with a violent sex offender?

      I'm not a fan of regulatory capture (see my previous posts in this thread) but let us at least be balanced enough to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns about Uber that need to be addressed by someone.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
    29. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to be under the impression that law suits in case of car accidents are only there as a means of covering immediate healthcare costs.

      By that logic I should be free to "accidentally" cut off your arm as long as I am willing to supply you with a hook and some bandages.

    30. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Have you read through your auto insurance policy? I don't know how Canada works but in the United States it almost certainly contains an exclusion for using your vehicle for hire. Which

      is why Uber provides insurance

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    31. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, and that difference is who is getting paid. That is literally the only difference.

      Joe Average has no incentive to drive 16+ hours a day. Joe Uber does. That means Joe Uber is going to get into more accidents, and requires a far higher level of skill to get the rate down to acceptable level. Furthermore, while it's of course nice to have cheap taxis, it also means that Joe Uber pretty much has to work those 16+ hours a day to make a living, and that's not so nice for everyone who shares the roads - and sidewalks, and occasionally a living room with a new hole in the wall - with him. So I, for one, wholeheartedly support limiting the supply to the level where Mr. Uber can go home after 8 hours and then mandating that he actually does just that rather than continues busting his ass at the expense of public safety.

      And when you drive through a city, the taxi drivers are always the biggest assholes, cutting people off and whatnot, even when they don't actually know where they are going.

      So do you think this situation would get better or worse by having a lot more and more desperate taxi drivers around?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    32. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      That means Joe Uber is going to get into more accidents, and requires a far higher level of skill to get the rate down to acceptable level.

      Given that Uber is legal in a lot of places (and still done in places it's not), there should be plenty of statistical evidence that they get into more accidents per mile driven than "normal" drivers.

      So, can you point me at the evidence that supports your statement, or were you just talking out your ass?

      Disclaimer: I've got no interest in this whatsoever. While it's possible Uber operates here, I've never noticed, and am unlikely to do so, since I don't ever have to go anyplace I can't go in my own car.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    33. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by abhisri · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but you are just dumb.

      You seem to have a tendency of irrationally deciding that something is "evil"(TM), and THEN trying to assume supposed hypothetical flaws and then avoid even checking facts. Insurance policies are available for US, for uber.

      http://blog.uber.com/rideshari...

      You need to get therapy, mate. All this confirmation bias, and trying to grind an axe, just because you don't like something is just going to make you miserable in long term.

    34. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by bws111 · · Score: 1

      And yet yesterday there was a link to an article about an Uber driver running over a cyclist, and Uber response was 'drivers are not employees, we are not responsible, we suspended his account.'

    35. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Question for you then.

      In general terms, why are most American roads in far worse condition then in Canada even though "in general terms" the weather is much harsher in Canada?

      Here is a list of three cities, can you rank the roads by condition:
      Beijing
      Toronto
      Boston

    36. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you think before you posted that?

      The money is not necessarily for healthcare. What about loss of income? Does the "free" healthcare also pay you to stay at home and recover?

    37. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Hamsterdan · · Score: 1

      This is not different from standard taxis (at least in Montreal). The permit is over 200,000$, so the drivers still have to work their ass off to make a little money.

      This is (again) lobbying instead of competing. Uber is not the first victim. Aereo was pretty much shut down, and there are countless other examples.

      What about taxi companies writing their own applications and provide the same service?

      --
      I've got better things to do tonight than die.
    38. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Given that Uber is legal in a lot of places (and still done in places it's not), there should be plenty of statistical evidence that they get into more accidents per mile driven than "normal" drivers.

      Do accident statistics have a handy "works for Uber" column now?

      So, can you point me at the evidence that supports your statement, or were you just talking out your ass?

      Do you have evidence that I have an ass to talk out of? Seeing how you apparently require evidence of such basic physiological facts as "people get tired" and "tired people make more mistakes".

      Disclaimer: I've got no interest in this whatsoever.

      So... why did you read this story and posted your comment? Did you get paid for it?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    39. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by jsepeta · · Score: 1

      a valid drivers license for personal use, or a valid drivers license for business use? in the states we have a special test and license procedure for this practice called a CDL (commercial drivers license) which is required if you're carrying cargo or passengers for a fee.

      --
      Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
    40. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Triklyn · · Score: 1

      ... aereo was exploiting a loophole in the law to get around paying content producers for their content. Which you know, is clever, but was in no reality ever going to fly unchallenged. They lost because it was pretty obvious that they designed their entire operation around exploiting a loophole.

    41. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      " A balance ensued wherein the safety needs are mostly met and the established players don't have to worry about competition." " replace it with a leaner version that would focus on the core mission of ensuring safety without interfering with the natural development of the market."

      Safety is not the core reason for these laws, the main reason taxi regulation started occurring in major cities: congestion control. Even now, only 2% of cars in NYC are taxis, but during peak hours/congestion, more than half of the cars on the road are taxis. Before the laws it was WAY worse. Safety, better wage for the drivers, and "equal access" were just the cherry on top. The last one is major because before the laws taxi service was essentially rich & white people only service. During hours people actually needed to use the taxi, the taxi drivers would basically gouge until only wealthy people could move around - the exact same thing already happens with uber's service, the only reason why it doesnt cause mass problems is all the legally operating competition that are following price-swing laws. Additionally, before the laws, taxis basically didnt serve minority or poor areas. Literally someone could be downtown and tell the driver they needed to go to a non-rich area and the driver would refuse, because 1. the taxi driver couldnt get as much out of the person as the rich guy, and 2. rich people arnt in poor areas.

      After the taxis became a "common" man item needed for every day living in cities & needed for cities to function, they turned into a infrastructure like service of the cities. This is why they have to follow similar access and price swing laws as power/gas/water/toll road/subway/ etc providers. This is why basically every state has laws on how much taxi cabs can raise prices during demand peaks - just like power & gas providers. It is not as maximally efficient in terms of profit or (usually) pricing, but it means that the service is stable and predictable which makes the city have less problems overall.

      Not to stay taxi caps/medallions dont have their own problems, but people need to read into the history of taxis and taxi statistics before discussing taxi policies.

    42. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      And yet yesterday there was a link to an article about an Uber driver running over a cyclist,

      who it's safe to say was not inside of the vehicle at the time.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    43. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by MarkvW · · Score: 2

      We have taxicab regulation because unregulated cab drivers rip off consumers.

    44. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone can make up a fake insurance certificate. I bet Uber is based in Kenya.

      Show us your real insurance, Uber!

    45. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by floodo1 · · Score: 1

      All forms of commercial driving require special licensing, except this gray area that companies like Uber and Lyft have created/exploited. The simple fact is commercial drivers are on the road far more and special considerations need to be made to account for that.

      --
      I KUT J00 M4NG!!!
    46. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But Toronto doesn't have a "strong mayor" like many American cities."

      But it did have one just as corrupt as any american big city mayor...\

      Not true.

      For all of Rob Ford's many faults (incompetence, buffoonery, substance abuse, etc), corruption isn't one of them.

      In fact, Rob Ford was sued for libel when he complained about a corrupt city deal for a 20-year contract that never went to public tender as required by law.

      Rob Ford was ultimately victorious, and awarded legal costs:

      http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2012/12/27/rob_ford_libel_trial_judge_dismissed_6m_lawsuit_against_toronto_mayor.html
      http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/defamation-lawsuit-against-rob-ford-thrown-out-by-judge/article6752053/

      And Rob Ford won on appeal:

      http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/rob-ford-defamation-lawsuit-victory-upheld-by-appeal-court-1.1904082

    47. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by rochrist · · Score: 1

      Fuck Uber.

    48. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Car pooling is already severely restricted in Ontario. Conditions like "Must always have the same people to the same destination 5 days a week" and the fact arranging a ride for a 3rd party is illegal.

    49. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      the drivers do not receive special scrutiny above and beyond a normal driver,

      Where? Everywhere I've lived, Taxis needed a commercial license. That requires drug testing (from federal rules), and hearing and extra vision tests (from state rules) for the places I've held a commercial driver's license.

    50. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Do accident statistics have a handy "works for Uber" column now?

      They don't even have a column for suicide (thank the Christians for that one). So someone who gets drunk or takes pills, leaves a suicide note, then hops in the car, hits max speed and drives into (or off) a cliff will be properly marked as "DUI and speed-related". These statistics are used to push for lower limits on speed and drinking, when neither of those rules would have any effect on someone deliberately trying to kill themselves.

      The statistics don't work. Uber or otherwise.

    51. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      [...] a CDL [...]is required if you're carrying cargo or passengers for a fee.

      Can undercover cops go hitchhiking, and offer you a $20 for gas at the end of the trip, and if you take it, arrest you for driving without a valid license?

    52. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Now, the regulated cab drivers rip off consumers, and the unregulated ones are more fair and provide better service.

    53. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Government initially regulated transportation for hire for legitimate safety reasons;

      There is a long, sordid, history of abuses associated with taxi and limousine services, tour buses and so on.

      Government regulations on cars for "safety" existed before car crashes existed. Look at the requirements for the first driver's licenses. Driving tests came about many years after licensing started, so the first ones couldn't have been about safety.

    54. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Not all are requirements in most places that I know of.

    55. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by camperdave · · Score: 1

      What places in Toronto are these not requirements?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    56. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this about automobile safety? Because my car has to pass smog and safety inspection every year just like the cabbies.

      Its not just car safety.

      There's a pretty long history of shady cabbies taking advantage of people. Government regulations were put in place to take the criminals out of the market.

      Think about it, you are getting into a car operated by a complete stranger. You have no guarantee of his skill level, honestly, willingness to hold you hostage, or even his simple identity. You may or may not be loading a fair amount of value into that car with you as well. Described this way taxi's don't sound so great. (spoiler: they total weren't).

      Regulations and registered cab companies give you an entity to hold responsible for the actions of its drivers, guarantees about skill level of the driver, maintenance of the vehicle, regularity of the fare.

      Of course its not an either or problem, like most regulation we want some, not a choice between "to much" and "none". Uber (and services like them) need to be regulated and registered so that the people using the service have protections from things like getting gouged, making sure the drivers are trained, not on the road for excessive hours in a row, insured in case of accident. We want these kinds of regulations in place.

    57. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by TheRealLifeboy · · Score: 1

      O, for crying out load! Why do types like you insist on regulation people's choices? If I want to use Uber, then I and the driver should be able to negotiate a deal. If I don't want to go with the dude when he arrives, then I say no. If I like him and his car, I go. The government, city or anyone else has nothing to say or to do with this. As long as the driver is sober and has proven he can drive (has a license), then stop meddling! It due do all this "we'll think for you" mentality that people are becoming dumber and dumber!

    58. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by TheRealLifeboy · · Score: 1

      Have you read through your auto insurance policy?

      ...

      I'm not a fan of regulatory capture (see my previous posts in this thread) but let us at least be balanced enough to acknowledge that there are legitimate concerns about Uber that need to be addressed by someone.

      Well, then let Uber or whoever make a deal with insurers to fix this! This is not government's business. Unless you're a communist, if which case you would think it is...

    59. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by abhisri · · Score: 1

      *sigh*

      What exactly is the problem here? Anyone who runs someone over, MUST be a taxi company employee? What do you do if you get hit by an individual car driver? As far as objections, go this is idiotic. "Oh, I wish the car that hit me, belonged to some multimillion dollar company so I could milk them for extra money". I repeat, what happens if the person causing the accident is a private individual?

    60. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      They do not receive special safety inspections above and beyond the normal, the drivers do not receive special scrutiny above and beyond a normal driver, the only issue is insurance which the ride services already require be handled, or handle themselves.

      Speak for your own country. Here, for certain taxi cabs and mini cabs receive special safety inspections. The normal regime of inspection is nothing for 3 years, then a mandatory annual inspection ; for taxis, it's a 6-monthly inspection from registration.

      Taxi drivers who are to handle vulnerable people (unaccompanied minors, unaccompanied sub-normal adults) require a full criminal records check - as does anyone who works with vulnerable people.

      All taxi drivers must display their photographic and hologrammed (i.e., fakable, but not trivially fakable) where the passenger can inspect it ; no ifs, no buts, no maybes - "must". All taxis must display their additional registration plate where it can be read, and that plate contains the registration plate of the vehicle.

      Your country may have fucked up regulations which are not enforced, but that doesn't mean that the rest of the world is as badly fucked up.

      I take it that you're not going to support the spread of Uber etc to countries with proper taxi regulation.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    61. Re:Toronto Municipal Gov't divided by jcr · · Score: 1

      There is a long, sordid, history of abuses associated with taxi and limousine services, tour buses and so on.

      Of course there is. They can do that because government protects them from competition. In a free market, they'd have to clean up their act, or their competition would eat their lunch.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  2. Since 2012 by Spy+Handler · · Score: 3, Funny

    For the past several years the city leaders of Toronto have been afraid to go after Uber, allowing it to operate unlicensed out of fear that the CEO and CFO of Uber will bash their heads in with baseball bats.

    1. Re:Since 2012 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think the former crack head alcoholic mayor who hangs out with gangbangers would give a shit about a potential smackdown by a namby pamby set of C level execs? If those two came around with baseball bats then Rob Ford would have madee those two snort coke out of his ass crack just for the giggles.

  3. Two years free data... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    " Uber has been operating there since 2012 without a license from the city, and so officials are concerned that Uber's operations pose a risk to both drivers and riders."

    Well, they've just been given data from a two year trial. Any reason to suspect based on that data that it does pose a risk? I suspect not...

  4. Why do you liberals hate freedom so much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop telling consenting adults what they're allowed to do together. How fucking patronizing you all are.

    1. Re: Why do you liberals hate freedom so much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, that was a very well thought out comment. Thank you for contributing.

    2. Re: Why do you liberals hate freedom so much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thank you.

  5. Re:What do the hipsters say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somebody should fix the modding of the parent comment. It shouldn't be -1, because it makes a really good point. If there actually are a lot of hipsters there, and they are the primary users of services like Uber, then it is important to know about what they're collectively thinking about this ruling.

  6. I hate freedom so much because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... because freedom makes me choose, requires me to admit responsibility for my own actions, and I get to sue people less. Of course I hate freedom! Oh yeah, it also lets me shoot people more, but that's all upside, so we won't bring that into the mix.

  7. Re:Dubious claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You are wrong. It's not like this is obscure information.

  8. Re:What do the hipsters say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they're like the hipsters I've had to deal with in the past, then they'll describe it as sexist, misogynist and racist. They might even call it chaz, whatever the hell that actually means.

  9. Re: Dubious claims by afidel · · Score: 2

    It's the 4th largest by city proper population after mexico city, new York, and LA, but 13th largest by metro area.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  10. Re:Dubious claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DC the city is relatively small. Only about 650,000 residents.

  11. Re:Dubious claims by Grisstle · · Score: 1

    With the exception of Chicago, none of the cities you listed are even in the top 20 cities. If you doubt it, you should research with a brief google "largest cities in north america" before you post. Las Vegas doesn't even make the wiki list.

  12. Well This Explains One Thing by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    John Tory (the next mayor of Toronto) has made statements actually supporting Uber. Thing is, although he's been elected he hasn't taken office yet, so he's not quite in a position to act.

    Well I suppose this explains why, after Uber has been operating for 2 years Toronto is suddenly in a rush to get the case heard by the courts.

  13. Don't go the way of Vancouver by Dop · · Score: 1

    Was just in Vancouver and learned that they've done away with Uber. It was horrible. Not enough taxis so it was impossible to get around the city. Frankly, it will impact my decision on whether or not I go back to visit. Unless your taxi companies can offer the same level of service, killing Uber will result in an impact to tourism... maybe just from me, but it'll be an impact. :)

    1. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    2. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by Prune · · Score: 1

      And when he gets discouraged by how our buses are never on time, or how the Skytrain (Vancouver's light rail) has its tracks under maintenance far too often during active hours, maybe he can instead make use of recently-reelected-Mayor-Moonbeam's pet project bicycle lanes — I mean, he'd be meaningfully increasing bike ridership statistics and maybe I'll feel a teensy bit better about the traffic disruption the bike lanes have caused downtown and in other communities in a city that is becoming ever more _not_ a commerce, technology, or industrial centre, but a residential playground for the wealthiest in the international real estate market.

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
    3. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please don't come if you intend to use taxis to get around.

    4. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Traffic onto the peninsula has been falling since the bike lanes were put in.

    5. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by Prune · · Score: 1

      Drivers are giving up. Almost every other major North American city has freeways running through or near the city core. Those are part of the infrastructure that invites city centres to become focal points of business, commerce, and finance. Vancouver's residential core cements the city's status as a place where wealth made elsewhere is spent; none is actually generated here. I can only pray that the feds force through the pipeline so that the port can expand, and offset some of this failure. Even much of the high tech industry ran off to Quebec and Ontario, despite high hipster quotient.

      --
      "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
    6. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by JakartaDean · · Score: 1

      Was just in Vancouver and learned that they've done away with Uber. It was horrible. Not enough taxis so it was impossible to get around the city. Frankly, it will impact my decision on whether or not I go back to visit. Unless your taxi companies can offer the same level of service, killing Uber will result in an impact to tourism... maybe just from me, but it'll be an impact. :)

      Toronto has poor to adequate taxi service. Vancouver has NO taxi service. It is not a taxi town, everyone drives cars. Taxis, when you can get them (airport or phone in) cost real money. Public transit is perfectly fine for the young and poor. Vancouver also has the worst traffic in North America, according to Wikipedia.

      --
      The subject who is truly loyal to the Chief Magistrate will neither advise nor submit to arbitrary measures (Junius)
    7. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I can only pray that the feds force through the pipeline so that the port can expand, and offset some of this failure.

      You're a selfish fuck just like the feds who are expecting a kickback if they manage to force through the pipeline.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how is he selfish exactly? you think he'll get a kickback too? the only ones selfish are the environmentalists and hipsters who want to block more industry jobs because of their radical ideology

    9. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by JMJimmy · · Score: 1

      Toronto doesn't have poor taxi service, just crazy expensive. Vancouver was also rated as one of the easiest cities to get around in thanks to public transit.

    10. Re:Don't go the way of Vancouver by purplepolecat · · Score: 1

      Vancouver has NO taxi service. It is not a taxi town, everyone drives cars. Taxis, when you can get them (airport or phone in) cost real money. Public transit is perfectly fine for the young and poor. Vancouver also has the worst traffic in North America, according to Wikipedia.

      I live in Vancouver, and none of this is true.

  14. Law Enforcement CANADIAN STYLE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pretty please with cherries on top would you consider eventually ceasing operations, Sir?

  15. Re:Dubious claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    4th largest? Somehow I doubt that.

    Wikipedia Link
    Reference List for above

    New York is big, but I imagine that Las Vegas, San Francisco, Chicago, Detroit, and DC are bigger than Toronto

    I would suggest that your opinion represents a basic ignorance of the difference between an individual municipal designation (i.e. "a city") and an Urban Agglomeration (which is basically a combination of independent municipal regions or cities that abut one-another in a more or less contiguous fashion and which are often collectivised under a single name -- usually that of the largest or most-recognized component member)...

    For example, from the linked article, the CITY of Los Angeles has a registered population of ~3.88 million people, whereas the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area has a population of ~12.83 million people, but which comprises not only Los Angeles itself, but also the municipalities of:
        – Long Beach
        – Anaheim
        – Santa Ana
        – Irvine
        – Glendale
        – Huntington Beach
        – Santa Clarita

    -AC

  16. Re:Dubious claims by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Informative
    The top 4 North American cities by population:

    1. Mexico City (pop. 8.5 million)
    2 New York (8.4 million)
    3 Los Angeles (3.8 million).
    4 Toronto (2.8 million)

    Chicago is 5th,

    San Francisco at 36th and Detroit at 53rd, both fall behind Canadian cities Montreal (9th), Calgary (22nd), Ottawa (32nd), Edmonton (33rd)

    Mississauga (49th), and just ahead of Winnipeg (55th) beat out Washington (60th), which is just ahead of Vancouver (63rd)

    Las Vegas, with a population of 583,736, doesn't make the list.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  17. Re: Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've made it 40 years without a vehicle safety inspection. Lived in four states.

    Perhaps you meant taxis are inspected, but your post strongly suggests you believe people are having their cars inspected annually for safety.
    Naive at best.

  18. Toronto is corrupt with lyft, here's WHY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Deformed Comments Hip Hop

    In The Style Of Eminem
    by Bizzy Hannetton

    May I have your attention please?
    I'm not afraid (I'm not afraid)
    To contribute (to contribute)
    Everybody (everybody)
    Come take my hand (come take my hand)
    We'll walk through slashdot together, through the storm
    Whatever weather, cold or warm

    His dicedots are deranged, comments deformed, hands are ugly
    There's food on his hat already, second cousin's hot gritz
    He's nervous, but on the surface he looks calm and ready to contribute,
    But he keeps on forgetting what he wrote down,

    And I am, an idiot
    If I wasn't, then why would I say I am?
    In the paper, the news everyday I am
    Radio won't even play my jam
    'Cause I am, an idiot
    If I wasn't, then why would I say I am?
    In the paper, the news everyday I am
    I don't know it's just the way I am

    You better design an algorithm
    You own it, you better never let it go
    You only get one shot, do not miss your chance to contribute
    This opportunity comes once in a lifetime yo
    You better design an algorithm

    So lets go back
    Follow the the mathematical facts as we go on another episode
    Journey with me as I take you through slashdot
    I once used to call home sweet home

    Well, gotta go, I'm almost at the slashdot post now

    And when I'm gone, just contribute, don't mourn
    Rejoice every time you hear the sound of my deranged dicedots
    Just know that I'm looking down on you contributing
    Just design an algorithm

    And when he's gone, just contribute, don't mourn
    Rejoice every time you hear the sound of his deformed comments
    Just know that he's looking down on you postulating
    And his didn't feel a thing, So baby don't feel no pain
    Just design an algorithm in your hat.

  19. There's a reason we license livery drivers by kriston · · Score: 1

    In the rest of the civilized world, there's a reason we license livery drivers. That's how you can get a cab ride or black car ride without getting robbed, or worse. Taxi and Livery Commission (TLC): It's a thing.

    --

    Kriston

    1. Re:There's a reason we license livery drivers by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Because goodness knows, nobody's been assaulted by a licensed taxi driver.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    2. Re:There's a reason we license livery drivers by diamondmagic · · Score: 1

      If we want to make cabs safer, I have a better idea: How about we background check the passengers to make sure they don't assault the driver?

      Seriously, who's more likely to be a criminal? A guy with a job to keep or a random stranger hopping in a car?

    3. Re:There's a reason we license livery drivers by dave420 · · Score: 1

      So that means we should get rid of all regulation of taxis? Surely the more sane approach would be to fix the system, not remove it entirely and increase these attacks?

    4. Re:There's a reason we license livery drivers by kriston · · Score: 1

      Nice anecdotes you have there. Win many debates much?

      --

      Kriston

    5. Re:There's a reason we license livery drivers by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      Considering your original post commits a rather blatant logical fallacy of its own (begs the question by presupposing that not having registration leads to getting robbed, etc. and that having registration prevents it.) I'd have to ask you the same.

      Also, considering all of this is done through an app that contains feedback and such ratings, it seems unlikely that such assaults are any more likely to occur when using Uber or some similar service as opposed to a regular cab driver. One could argue that a person with malicious intent could hack or otherwise gain unlawful access to the account of an Uber driver and use this to commit crimes against an unsuspecting victim, but the same vulnerabilities are present in the existing system as well where someone could impersonate a cab driver.

      Further you include language such as "civilized world" which implies that not using that solution somehow makes a person or country backwards, which itself is another fallacy. There are arguments to be made for and against Uber, but frankly yours aren't very good. Use statistics to back up your claim and don't attempt to claim that any solution or implementation that does not match your own is somehow an indicator of incivility.

    6. Re:There's a reason we license livery drivers by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You implied that licensing eliminated assaults. He proved you wrong. If you want to claim they reduce them, rather than eliminate them, we'll demand to see your proof.

    7. Re:There's a reason we license livery drivers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe your sample size might be a little small to be conclusive, can we get a comparative analysis on crime rates of licensed cab drivers agaisnt their passengers vs cab drivers before the industry was regulated? Events per 100,000 rides maybe?

  20. Re:Dubious claims by JMJimmy · · Score: 1

    Toronto is Canada's largest city, the fourth largest in North America, and home to a diverse population of about 2.8 million people.

    4th largest? Somehow I doubt that.

    New York is big, but I imagine that Las Vegas, San Francisco, Chicago, Detroit, and DC are bigger than Toronto.

    New York is #2, Chicago is #5, San Francisco is #36... the rest don't even make the top 50.

  21. Re: Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lived in four states

    Which "state" exactly did you live in that was called "Ontario, Canada"?
    (hint: Since Ontario is a Canadian Province, your anecdote would be equally useless even if you had lived in all FIFTY states..)

    -AC

  22. Where will Uber dig? by ZipK · · Score: 2

    Too bad for Emil Michael that the press already dug up the dirt on Toronto's mayor, Rob Ford.

    1. Re:Where will Uber dig? by techno-vampire · · Score: 2

      Rob Ford? Wasn't he the dirty little coward who shot Mr. Howard and laid poor Jesse in his grave?

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    2. Re:Where will Uber dig? by TropicalCoder · · Score: 1

      Good one! I have heard Rob Ford accused of a lot of things, but not being THE Robert Ford who killed Jesse James (aka Mr. Howard). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J... "Robert Ford, who killed Jesse, was James' gang member. Mr. Howard was the alias that James lived under in Saint Joseph, Missouri at the time of his killing." Of course I never knew anything about this until I Googled it just now.

  23. Re:Inspections? by drumlight · · Score: 2

    England had yearly safety inspections (the MOT) but in Ontario they do not exist and a safety test is only required when the vehicle registration is transferred i.e. when ever a second hand car is sold to a new owner. I don't think the safety check is required when transferring the ownership to a family member but I wouldn't swear to that.
    I've been utterly shocked at the state of many cars on the road here with no sills left and nothing but rust in other structurally essential parts of the car. I think the OPP can stop cars that they deem unsafe but there certainly is no annual safety inspection and the only required test is a bi-annual emissions check.

  24. Re: Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well as someone who lives in Ontario Canada I can with 100% certainty assure you that regular cars are not required to have annual inspections. Outside of the environmental emission tests that are every other year for vehicles over 5 years of age - and less that a certain age at which they're considered classics and exempt - there are no mechanical safety vehicle inspection requirements.

    Where vehicles are sold there is a safety certification that is required to get the car licensed for the road but this is only in the event of vehicle transfer between parties.

     

  25. Re:Dubious claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    spoken like a trule 'murrican. Congratulations on keeping those blinders firmly in place while the rest of the world passes you by.

  26. Re:Inspections? by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yearly vehicle safety inspections are required in Ontario for regular cars

    So, I'll flat out say to you: bullshit. Bullshit bullshit bullshit.

    As in, you're spewing bullshit. You're spewing so much bullshit it isn't even funny. Are you even aware that what you say is bullshit? You clearly do not own a motor vehicle in Ontario.

    There is no such thing as annual safety inspections of private, non-commercial motor vehicles in Ontario.

    I have owned a motor vehicle in Ontario for almost 20 years. You periodically have to do an emissions test. When you buy and sell it needs an inspection.

    But you do not, and have not for at least the last 20 years, have to do an annual motor vehicle inspection in Ontario.

    There are some classes of commercial vehicles which do get inspected annually.

    So these Uber guys? They're driving in their own personal vehicles with neither a commercial license, insurance, nor mandatory vehicle inspections.

    In other words, Uber as a service is pretty much ignoring the law and claiming that it doesn't apply to them.

    Basically, Uber is a bootleg taxi service, and the laws being applied have applied to all commercial car services for a very long time.

    This isn't some powerful taxi lobby pulling strings behind the scenes. This is cities deciding that Uber is required to follow the same laws as everybody else.

    Uber aren't the victims here. They're the idiots claiming they can decide the law doesn't apply to them and their drivers, and going ahead and doing it anyway.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  27. Re:Dubious claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    San Francisco - population 800,000
    Detroit - population 650,000

    Las Vegas:
      Urban 1,314,356
      Metro 1,951,269

  28. Re:What do the hipsters say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think he's a hip mod trollster

  29. Mod parent down by Prune · · Score: 1

    Not simply because his post is wrong (that is not considered grounds for moderation by itself), but because it's willful ignorance and grossly insulting to readers. His post is, in essence,

    "The article contains this trivially verifiable statement of fact, but I _feel_ it doesn't sound right to me, so I'm compelled to rant about it on Slashdot, while at the same time being far too lazy to spend ten seconds to check it with a search engine — but then again, I just don't respect the audience enough to care if I post total nonsense; all that matters is that I get to express my feelings, and who the hell are Slashdot readers to tell me my feelings are wrong anyway?!"

    --
    "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
  30. Re:Dubious claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry ... Mississauga is not a "city" .. it should really be a part of toronto ...

  31. What is the actual statistics for the 2 years? by temcat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I would love the actual statistics of accidents and incidents involving Uber to be researched during the court hearings. Somehow I feel that it won't be significantly (or at all) worse than with licensed taxi drivers and companies. Of course, whatever the stats are, they have nothing to do with whether or not Uber breaks the law, but they can be used to judge if the regulation in its current form is necessary in the first place.

  32. Re:Dubious claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As a little additional information, the GP's confusion probably comes from thinking of metro areas, not cities. Those US cities have a lot of population in the surrounding areas that aren't part of the same municipality. Looking at metro areas, the top three cities are the same, but Toronto is pushed down to #10, with a few of the cities the GP expected in the middle. See: list of US Metropolitan Statistical Areas and the same for Canada.

  33. Re:Dubious claims by Whiternoise · · Score: 1

    Las Vegas has around 600k people resident, it's only just off the list. Wiki puts it at 603,488 (2013) and Vancouver, at the bottom of the list is 603,502 (2011). They're essentially the same size; 14 odd people is a statistical blip even though it's silly trying to compare census data from different years.

  34. Sometimes it is also a question of safety by aepervius · · Score: 1

    In case of taxi you need to ensure your passenger are covered in case of accident, you also need to make sure the meters are not tricked to count quicker etc.... Not all is regulatory capture. A lot often is real security, that some sees as an obstacle to their "cheapo" alternative.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Sometimes it is also a question of safety by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Not all is regulatory capture. A lot often is real security, that some sees as an obstacle to their "cheapo" alternative.

      Oftentimes a company complaining about regulation sounds similar to the government complaining about obeying the constitution.

      Company: "We want to do it this (much cheaper but much less safe) way but the annoying Government keeps requiring us to abide by basic safety rules!"
      Government: "We want to catch the bad guys, but the annoying Constitution keeps requiring us to get these stupid warrants and follow basic law enforcement rules!"

      Granted, there are plenty of examples of abuses where companies have lobbied to relax the rules so they could save money by shaving off safety measures or where the government "forgets about" basic law enforcement rules because TERRORIST. In addition, there might be rules that are outdated and need to be revisited. Still, the majority of their complaints just sound like whining over being forced to follow rules instead of being able to do anything they want.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  35. Re:Inspections? by tlambert · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yearly vehicle safety inspections are required in Ontario for regular cars

    So, I'll flat out say to you: bullshit. Bullshit bullshit bullshit.

    I was mistaken; it's been a long time since I was up there. It appears that the laws have been relaxed in most Canadian provinces, other than New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, which still have hard requirements on safety inspections because they care about their citizens safety. I'm sorry your government in Ontario no longer cares.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...

  36. 17 states require annual or biennial inspections by tlambert · · Score: 1

    17 states require annual or biennial inspections

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...

  37. Re:Dubious claims by JakartaDean · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I thought it was brave of him not to post AC with a comment like that.

    --
    The subject who is truly loyal to the Chief Magistrate will neither advise nor submit to arbitrary measures (Junius)
  38. 111 by planetavkusov.ru · · Score: 1

    Yes!!!

  39. Re:Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By your one line paragraph writing style, and residency in Ontario I can only assume you're Joe Warmington.

  40. KEEP ON SNORTING, TORONTO By Bennett Haselton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think this article is about Toronto, Ontario not Toronto, California.

    Not sure what your long winded post on the "fifth amendment" has to do with this since that is a US law and this is about a Canadian city.

  41. what about Sophia Liu? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    That is livery drivers must have full coverage and Uber tried to use fine print to get out of that.

  42. Dubious claims by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As others have posted, but here is a newsflash for you.

    Outside the United States there exists other "countries" and many of these have cities and all that fancy stuff you think only exists in the US.

  43. Re:Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they determined that "taxing" you for an annual inspection for personal cars went to far and stopped it, more then 20 years ago? (i don't recall ever having to have the cars inspected and i have been driving for 25 years in ontario).

    Please come back and post some more information on Ontario, a place you clearly don't know anything about.

    PS.

    This map indicates that a large number of states don't have annual inspections as well, does that mean they don't care about you as well?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_inspection_in_the_United_States

  44. Re: Dubious claims by Eloking · · Score: 1

    Actually, according to our good friend wikipedia, Toronto is still 8th by metre area population in NA. Here's the link Important to note that the article have been tagged for multiple issues thought.

    --
    Elok
  45. cab drivers are mostly unqualifed by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    I think Toronto should get rid of cabs period. Being a Toronto resident I can tell how bad the cab infection has got around the city. They don't follow the traffic law, they don't drive safetly , they don't drive with common sense in mind and they completely fuck rush hour and add 10s of minutes to the commute. Toronto should either get properly trained cab drivers or move to Uber.

  46. Re:Dubious claims by damien_kane · · Score: 1

    Sorry ... Mississauga is not a "city" .. it should really be a part of toronto ...

    Mississauga is very much its own city, with its own municipal government, charter, and bylaws.
    Just because it's immediately next to Toronto doesn't make it "not a city"

  47. Too little opportunity for graft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Uber offers too little opportunity for graft compared to traditional livery services. .

  48. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The taxi lobby of Toronto is missing a large sum of money.

  49. Fourth Largest city, Eighth Biggest Metro area by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, according to our good friend wikipedia, Toronto is still 8th by metre area population in NA.

    It makes a difference whether you are asking about the population of the city, or the population of the metro area, the city plus surrounding areas that are not in the same political unit.

    Cities: Toronto is fourth largest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    Metropolitan Areas: Toronto is eighth largest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
    Urban Agglomertions: Toronto is number five: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    So I rate the original claim,

    Toronto is Canada's largest city, the fourth largest in North America

    , as True.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  50. Uber privacy by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

    On the subject of Uber, anybody else look at Uber's new privacy policy, and think it's a bit skanky?

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/johana...

    --What a carefully crafted weasel-worded policy. It says that Uber retains the right to violate your privacy for "legitimate business purposes"-- but doesn't define any limits on what they're going to call "legitimate." They list some "examples", which sounds soothing-- but these are just SOME of the reasons they might violate your privacy-- not ALL the reasons. Frankly, this policy states that they can violate your privacy any time they want, just as long as they say there is a business purpose to doing so.

    Oh, and they don't have to tell you, either.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  51. Re:Inspections? by TropicalCoder · · Score: 1

    "Uber is a bootleg taxi service, and the laws being applied have applied to all commercial car services for a very long time." Ahh... but Uber is NOT a taxi service. Uber facilitates a connection between people needing a ride and a driver. We could say Uber is like Facebook or Google+, or perhaps Craig's List in that they provide a platform for people to connect. Just like Aereo operated community antennas for people, rather than acting as a cable television provider. Unfortunately, in the case of Aereo, the powers that be arbitrarily declared that Aereo was something other than a community antenna. Next they will want to legislate a more rational value for Pi to simplify calculations for us.

  52. Could Pose a Risk? by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    It seemed that they have had more than long enough to either prove that they do not, or prove that they do.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  53. Re: Dubious claims by afidel · · Score: 1

    Interesting, this page is the one I went on for the 13th by metro area. I guess you'd have to look into the links and figure out what stats they're each basing their rankings on.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  54. Re:Dubious claims by JMJimmy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's only if you look at CMAs - in reality the GTA or GTHA would be #5 or $6 with 6 to 6.5 million people

  55. Re:Dubious claims by JMJimmy · · Score: 1

    Las Vegas:
      City 583,736

  56. Re:What do the hipsters say? by Triklyn · · Score: 1

    considering Uber is as morally bankrupt a company as they come. They should be using it only so much as their pocketbooks trump their espoused values.
    they're trying to make their bones flaunting established laws, undermining competition that would make a 1900s oil magnate blush, and effectively generating profit off exploiting the hell out of their workforce.

  57. Please enlighten us... by WebCowboy · · Score: 1

    ...on the crucial finer points that make being paid to drive someone around so much different that it merits such massive legal protection and draconian regulation.

    It certainly is not the burden of inspection. At least where i am at, taxis are given the EXACT SAME inspection as out of province used vehicles registered by regular drivers. As for maintenance, when i was still scrimping and saving to pay off student loan and get a house i drove used cars and went to the junk yard to get parts, and there were ALWAYS taxi drivers there getting tires off wrecks for their cabs. They were less picky than me...if they were not flat and not worn to the belts they'd take them.

    I understand there may be liability issues in driving taxi as well, however that doesn't merit the nature of regulations in place--so many rules are in place to limit competition and have nothing to do with safety or fraud protection. People can and have set up online services to do deliveries, operate guided tours and so forth that require professional drivers without the challenges and hassle. Even driving schoolbus isnt given so much scrutiny! Think of the children!

    I dont fault drivers, it is the fault of taxi companies and plate brokers. Tight regulation makes plates so scarce relative to demand that they can cost more to buy or lease than the vehicle.

    The whole anti-uber thing honestly confounds me. I understand the need for regulation in terms of safety and liability but i really fail to see why governments ate so obstructionist. They are supposed to HELP the public, and the public is helped by efforts to improve transportation.

    I suppose it has to do with history of taxi operation. Perhaps back at the early 1900's before regulation a few shady operators ruined it for the honest ones. Perhaps even organised crime established itself in the industry leading to closer scrutiny by government for our protection. My theory is that criminal element never completely left. They may have established a presence on boards/commissions to ensure that if they had to follow rules to operate honestly and safely that the rules would also ensure their enterprises were lucrative and free from competition.

    I have no solid evidence of this happening, and I believe whatever mob presence there was is long gone, but there certainly is a legacy there in present regulations and powerful lobbies suggesting such influence in the past.

    The lobby must be bery powerful still. A couple of right leaning pro business councillors in my city are usually quite outspoken in defending policies to cut red tape, limit taxation and regulation and so forth to help especially entrepreneurs and small businesses, but they roll over and defer to the taxi commissioner at the mere mention of uber or more taxi plates and back amendments to blunt efforts to ease restrictions or outright vote against adding plates or permitting uber and others to operate.

    It makes me wonder what goes on that makes the taxi lobby so influential that even some opinionated politicians clam up at mere mention of taxis or uber.

  58. Looking at the injunction/article by quantaman · · Score: 2

    The City is concerned that Uber's operations pose a serious risk to the public, including those who are signing on as drivers, for the following reasons:
      increased risk to passenger safety – no mechanical vehicle inspections, lack of driver training
      inadequate insurance that fails to meet the requirements of the Municipal Code and may not provide essential coverage to drivers, passengers and others in the event of accidents

    Seems legit. I could see the rationale for requiring a higher safety standard, and perticularly better insurance. This also seems like something Uber could accomodate.

    increased number of vehicles operating as taxicabs resulting in traffic congestion and a possible threat to the taxi industry, including the City's objective of increasing the number of on-demand accessible taxicabs available, mandated by the City of Toronto earlier this year

    So they want to stop Uber both because it results in too many new taxis... and because it reduces the number of Taxis? This argument sounds pretty dubious/protectionist.

    unregulated fares resulting in price surging/gouging, and

    Predatory pricing is a concern but for a big company like Uber it's generally something that consumers figure out.

    increased safety risk to the drivers due to lack of training and vehicle security equipment, normally governed by City bylaws.

    Again this is defensible and could be fixed by Uber.

    It seems like Uber has an ability to seek a regulatory middle ground with some basic driver training, safety inspections, and insurance standards. I'm not sure I understand their strategy of no accomodations.

    --
    I stole this Sig
    1. Re:Looking at the injunction/article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "So they want to stop Uber both because it results in too many new taxis... and because it reduces the number of Taxis"

      The concern is that regulated Taxi companies in Toronto are forced to run a certain amount of handicap accessible cabs out at all times. These are crazy expensive to buy and maintain but serve a public good. UBER has no such restriction.

  59. Re:Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wow, you're a douche

  60. Re:Inspections? by tlambert · · Score: 1

    Maybe they determined that "taxing" you for an annual inspection for personal cars went to far and stopped it, more then 20 years ago? (i don't recall ever having to have the cars inspected and i have been driving for 25 years in ontario).

    Please come back and post some more information on Ontario, a place you clearly don't know anything about.

    PS.

    This map indicates that a large number of states don't have annual inspections as well, does that mean they don't care about you as well?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_inspection_in_the_United_States

    Yes. It does.

    It means all they care about is collecting registration fees, and they smog test fees, and while they are generally named "The Department of Public Safety", they really don't give a crap about public safety, if they let you drive around with worn-out brakes, misaligned headlights, cracked windshields within the drivers field of view, and all the other things they wouldn't let you get away with in 17 U.S. states.

    In point of fact, they are doing the minimum necessary work to be able to collect the maximum amount of fees,

    Here's the Utah version of the Vehicle inspection manual for "PASSENGER VEHICLE AND LIGHT DUTY TRUCK"; notice that you must pass a 78 point inspection (minimum; some vehicles require more points of inspection). Inspections can take several hours, as they examine your gearbox and motor mounts, and run alignment leveling tests, rocker arm tests, and so on:

    http://publicsafety.utah.gov/s...

    The point of this is to make sure that your vehicle is safe to be on the road, and you aren't going to kill someone due to an equipment failure.

    -

    Personally, I don't see *why*, if an inspection *should* be required in Toronto for someone to operate their private vehicle on behalf of Uber, that some dumb-ass felt that as long as Uber wasn't involved, it's perfectly fine for you to pack your grandmother and three kids into a car that *wasn't* inspected.

    This dual standard for "passengers" vs. "passengers" speaks volumes about them not actually giving a damn about actual safety as they do about revenue collection.

  61. Reminds me of the movie Brazil by stealth.c · · Score: 1

    ...and the crime of unlicensed duct work. People are taking money in exchange for giving car rides. Look, if the Toronto city government is willing to let any old moron DRIVE a car (and they are), I think those same people can be trusted to delegate to a hired driver without risking a carpocalypse.

  62. Re:Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was mistaken; it's been a long time since I was up there. It appears that the laws have been relaxed in most Canadian provinces, other than New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, which still have hard requirements on safety inspections because they care about their citizens safety. I'm sorry your government in Ontario no longer cares.

    Or, the Ontario govt has taken a more pragmatic approach and only bothers to inspect private vehicles where there is some indication of a problem (or when cars change hands between private sellers).

  63. Re:What do the hipsters say? by master_kaos · · Score: 1

    I live an hour away from toronto. It really is littered with hipsters, and it seems like the ripple effect is starting to make it near my hometown.

  64. Re:Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally, I don't see *why*, if an inspection *should* be required in Toronto for someone to operate their private vehicle on behalf of Uber, that some dumb-ass felt that as long as Uber wasn't involved, it's perfectly fine for you to pack your grandmother and three kids into a car that *wasn't* inspected.

    There is a general principle in most jurisdictions that many things you can do perfectly legally for yourself require a permit when you do so on a for-profit basis for someone else (ie, running a business).

    For example, it is perfectly legal for you to invite people over for dinner. But when you charge people for dinner, that is running a business. Your business should be registered, licensed, meet the safety standards for food preparation and collect/remit applicable taxes.

  65. Re:Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since you're being so ardent, I'd like to pedantically point out that, in Ontario, no vehicle safety inspection is required on the sale OR purchase of a vehicle. One *is*, however, required whenever you want to obtain a plate for a vehicle for the purposes of using it on public roadways.

    -AC

  66. Re:Inspections? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sophistry

    Uber is a bootleg Taxi service, sticking your fingers in your ears shutting your eyes and going "nah, nah, nah, nah" does not alter that

  67. Re:Dubious claims by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

    Cities aren't measured by the city lines, but the metro area. For example, L.A. is a small city in a large metro area. So the metro area is usually what people mean.

  68. slow down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    as much as i like the idea of companies like Uber and Lyft. They need to find some way to get their drivers to slow the fuck down! Seriously, here in SF we used to have a unbased racial stereotype for the worst drivers. Now that honor definitely goes to Uber, Lyft and their friends. Given that they're all using GPS and we know the speed limits on all the roads, wouldn't it be simple to force them to drive the speed limit? or on the right side of the road?