Slashdot Mirror


Uber Shut Down In Multiple Countries Following Raids

wired_parrot (768394) writes "Worldwide raids were carried out against Uber offices in Germany, France and South Korea. In Germany, the raids followed a court ruling banning Uber from operating without a license. In Paris, raids followed an investigation into deceptive practices. And in South Korea, 30 people, including Uber's CEO, were charged with running an illegal taxi service."

10 of 366 comments (clear)

  1. ignoring the law, just dumb. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ignoring the law is not a good business strategy because you go to jail or at least court. they should have done what other companies do and buy some people in the government and have the laws changed in their favor.

    on second thought, maybe it's for the best.

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  2. Re: the establishment really does not like competi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except Uber is just exploiting people to enrich themselves.

  3. Re: the establishment really does not like competi by JonathanR · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think they call that "commerce". The drivers are probably exploiting Uber for their own enrichment.

  4. Re:the establishment really does not like competit by quantaman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know, licensing has a bit of a reason behind it, but still, I can't help feel that its the established players who want to kill any newcoming competition. that - in itself - really annoys me.

    I wonder if this will backfire and people will want to support the underdog.

    Maybe that's the reason why the laws weren't changed, but it's not the reason Uber is getting shut down.

    They based their business model on breaking the law. When they were told they were breaking the law they ignored the authorities and kept on breaking it.

    There are times when you break laws as a matter of civil disobedience, and there are other times when you break them because they're really hard to follow. This was neither, this was Uber saying they know they're breaking the law with every transaction they make and they're going to keep on breaking the law until you legalize what they're doing because they're make more money that way. That's not how things work, if you pretend the law doesn't exist then you experience the consequences.

    --
    I stole this Sig
  5. Re:But they help also by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    if their product is so superior they should have no problems complying with basic licensing requirements that exist for very serious reasons.

    --
    A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
  6. Re:But they help also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uh... that so-called "basic licensing requirements" is a joke. There is no reason that Taxi Tokens (licenses) should be as expensive and hard to obtain as they are. Follow the money. Yes, Uber should follow the law, same as every Taxi company. Yes, the law needs to change to something based on science not bribery.

  7. Oligopoly by jklovanc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Taxis in most cities are oligopolies in that the business is controlled by a few companies. The reason oligopolies are created is that they are compensation for requirements put on them by the government. Here are a few examples of what taxi companies are required to do or have that Uber is not.
    1. Commercial licenses for drivers.
    2. Minimum number of cars on the road
    3. Vehicle inspections
    4. Insurance requirements.
    5. Minimum wage for drivers
    6. Minimum number of handicap accessible vehicles.
    7. Requirement to pick up anyone regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.
    8. Set rate fares
    9. Background checks
    10. Accountability for drivers' actions (Uber just throws their hands in the air and says "they are a contractor I have no control" while taxi companies get fined)
    11. Governance by a taxi board who decides on fines for poor service.
    The laws for taxis have grown through the years and no jurisdiction in their right mind would want to go back to the days of no taxi regulations.

    If Uber is allowed to flourish they may drive conventional taxis out of business. When the fad of driving for Uber fades we will be in a much worse situation.

  8. Re: the establishment really does not like competi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think they call that "commerce". The drivers are probably exploiting Uber for their own enrichment.

    Hahahaha no. Uber doesn't pay to maintain the vehicles, the drivers do. Both cleaning and mechanical upkeep. Uber doesn't pay for the insurance on the vehicle, and many of these drivers will find out the hard way that using it for Commercial Contract work falls outside their insurance terms & conditions. In many cases they will also find out the hard way that what they are doing is technically Commercial vehicle operation, which requires a different class of driver's license in most places- a license which is harder to get and easier to lose. The drivers are the ones liable in the event a passenger decides to sue them for something, and will have to foot their own legal bills to defend themselves. They're going to realize that their tax filing has to be done differently. They're going to find out they're the ones on the hook for not carrying the proper levels of insurance/bonding.

    Look, it's pretty simple. If you get paid to give someone a ride, you're operating the vehicle for Commercial Purposes. There's a whole host of things you have to adhere to in order to do that legally. What Uber is doing is shifting that burden onto the drivers, most of whom don't understand the actual costs involved.

    I like the idea behind what the Uber App itself does, but I dislike how the company actually operates. It's not "ride sharing" if you pay anything at all for the ride, period.

  9. Re:But they help also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Taxi Tokens exist as a way to limit the number of Taxi's (and thus works as a "Taxi Union" of sorts) , and there are extremely specific licensing requirements just to have one.

    Uber threatens that monopoly. Which is good. There is no reason a Taxi medallion should cost more than the fricken vehicle by a factor of 10. NYC is one example of where the Taxi Medallions are used as investment leverage and not for their intended purpose. Vancouver BC is another (Where Taxi's can't cross city boundaries to pick up fares.) Uber barely had a chance in Vancouver before the Taxi cartel swayed the government against them.

    And in a way Uber is skirting the law much in the way Megaupload did. They know they are operating an illegal taxi service, and barely want to acknoledge the amount of scams going on that use it.

    Hell CSI:Cyber today is basically saying just that "Uber is unsafe"

  10. Re: Yay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Meanwhile, in right wing capitalist America, the law still doesn't matter if you're a corporation.