Slashdot Mirror
Uber Raided By Dutch Authorities, Seen As 'Criminal Organization'
An anonymous reader writes: Uber offices in Amsterdam have been raided by Dutch authorities, as reported by several local media sources (Google translation of original in Dutch). This follows intimidatory deterrence practices earlier in The Netherlands, with Uber drivers being fined in the past months, and fresh allegations that the company would act as a "criminal organization" by offering a platform for taxi rides without license (read: without the authorities earning money from the practice). Time for tech companies to consider moving their European offices elsewhere?
Uber's lawyers must be incredibly busy. Proposed regulations in London would effectively end the company's service there, while the mayor of Rio de Janeiro said he would ban Uber's operations outright. They're receiving mixed messages from Australia — just a day after running afoul of regulations in New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory is moving to legalize it.
Who would stop people from buying superior transportation services on a voluntary basis?
Fuck the taxi cartels and the governments that support them.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
It is currently not allowed to offer taxi services without a permit (and related stuff: insurance, markings on the car etc. depending on EU-country).
Work to change the law before you start the business.
There are lots of things you can't do without certification/permits/etc. If your plan is to fuck it all then you ARE working outside of the law. (car analogy: building your own car and not approving it - or in tax-insane Finland: paying car import tax on the burocrat-estimated worth of your self-built car).
Like it or not every gad damned fucking country has it's own fucking laws.
You have three fucking options:
1. Obey the fucking laws
2. Try to change the fucking law
Or
3. Fuck off!
Stop fucking whining.
Why the scare quotes around 'criminal organisation'? Uber's business model is to break the laws of every country they operate in and then hoping that the authorities are too timid to crack down on them. That by definition makes them a criminal organisation.
Oh, and nice bit of LOLbertarian bias in the summary.
In an attempt to cut through the bullshit of what *might* happen and work directly from evidence, I came across a report of a Cato institute study:
A Cato Institute study shows key differences between rideshare services and taxis, but passenger safety isn't one of them.
The other differences are not as important and will probably get solved by other means. For example, cleanliness of the ride, courtesy of the driver, and gypping the customer can be handled by the Uber feedback system.
The economists here are quick to point out the importance of liquidity, and Uber adds much needed liquidity to the taxi system.
Can anyone justify the expense and bureaucracy of taxi medallions when passenger safety isn't an issue?
"Time for tech companies to consider moving their European offices elsewhere?"
how about, Time for tech companies to stop thinking local laws don't fucking apply to them. Either obey the law, fight to get the laws changed or get the fuck out of the market. NO company should get to decide what laws they will and won't obey, that is a slippery slope that no one wants to be on.
What doesn't Uber understand about municipal codes? Yes, taxi service sucks, but just because I think I want to get to work faster doesn't mean I can break the speed limit. We have laws for a reason; if Uber wants to compete,it has to compete according to the LAW. If it wants to change the law, the ballot is where that should happen. After all, Uber is lining the pockets of politicians now, anyway - to let them help Uber break the law. It's absurd.
ACT got it right for once, hopeful other states follow their lead.
Requirements seem reasonable (many of these fall under general vehicle/driving legislation anyway) :
- Must submit to a criminal background history check.
- Must maintain a clean driving history.
- Must submit to health checks (e.g.: eyesight).
- Must drive a registered roadworthy vehicle (verified through inspections).
- Must have appropriate insurance (CTP & Property).
- Must not be under the influence of alcohol (or drugs) while carrying a passenger.
- Restricted from picking up passengers from hails or from areas specifically designated for taxis (maintaining some value to the taxi license).
At the same time they've lowered the licensing fees for taxi operators (to 1/4 of current by 2017). Seems pretty fair to me.
In the Netherlands we mostly have a mix of semi free market and government regulation.
The government sets the ground rules and free competition is possible within that platform.
Taxi drivers have to obey by many strict laws. Uber "taxis" do not.
The current position of the government is that Uber poses unfair competition as Uber users do not comply with the regulation required for Taxi drivers while essentialy offering the same services.
Technically, if Uber can make their drivers comply to the Taxi driver rules the app would be no problem.
Much of the advantage would be lost in the process though..
And it's a bit of a killer for innovation and keeps prices high.
Personally i like the sharing culture Uber promotes.
But i don't think the attitude towards Uber taxis will change anytime soon.
...in some countries. They're openly breaking the law. However - where regulations are faulty or problematic hampering the freedom of providing a valued service to the populace, this type of disruption is the only way to drive forward new growth markets and change 'the way' it is. Just because something is averse to a current corporate/government structure doesn't make it bad, although it is in many cases criminal.
I'd be curious about stats of Uber users - is it just a loud minority who aim their sites at the company? I'm guessing it is. Everyone I know who uses Uber loves it, and while I feel for the taxi drivers who pay into medallions or permits to drive cabs, markets....get.....disrupted......and this is a f'n good disruption.
Doesn't matter. A law is a law. Period.
Apropos of nothing, how do you feel about Rosa Parks not moving to the back of the bus?
Ueber likes to promote itself as a happy camper ride along service, but is morphing more and more into a global taxi sweatshop.
No longer is it just take on somebody for a ride, but exploiting legal loopholes to employ taxi drivers without any benefits, dodging taxes etc, and keep full control over them.
How about, Time for tech companies to stop thinking local laws don't fucking apply to them. Either obey the law, fight to get the laws changed or get the fuck out of the market.
How about, "Time for taxi drivers to stop posting drivel and stop using "fuck" in every sentence?
The basis of law is justice. When laws are seen to be unjust, they are often struck down through the efforts of concerted civil disobedience. Prime examples are Rosa Parks not moving to the back of the bus, Martin Luthor's sit-ins, and the Boston Tea Party.
There, see that above? The section in bold? That's called an argument.
An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.
You want abuse - that's room 12.
" (read: without the authorities earning money from the practice)" no that is called breaking the law. You may not like the law, but it is the law.Work to have it repelled or Stuff up. Break the law ? Then get what's coming at you. How worked up would you be if companies started seeing EPA or FDA rules as "stuff the authorities made up for earning money from the practice" ? Like for example checking for salmonella in peanut butter and withdrawing it from circulation if contaminated ? Same difference, the dutch have law. respect them or GTFO.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
We have laws for taxi business for a good reason. There are higher technical requirements on taxi cars and to get a taxi license you need to pass a background check and a special education. There are problems with people being mugged or raped by unlicensed taxi drivers...
Here in Sweden Uber Pop is quite illegal for that reason but the standard Uber service employ licensed taxi drivers and probably is legal. Uber Pop claims to have a background check but have been outed not to use the check in practice. Also Uber Pop do not pay any labor taxes as they are very clearly required to here, there are no loopholes for that.
Under Dutch law you can go to jail for just being a member of a criminal organisation. If I worked for Uber in any way ,I would resign now.
I felt she went the correct way, protested, then the law was repelled by ballot. Now it is up to ubber. If they want to pretend doing civil right, good for them, but they WILL get the law punishment. Up to them to prove in appeal court it was a civil right matter or a civil protest. good luck on that one. Civil protest means that you are intentionally breaking the law and accept the consequence. Good for them. But it is still breaking the law.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
I have been wondering for about a year now, what is holding Uber back to go out to Taxi companies and offer their service to them? Seems like a huge win-win-win as all the normal Taxi backend services suck... And the law issue would be solved.
> read: without the authorities earning money from the practice
Nice bit of editorialising there.
and fresh allegations that the company would act as a "criminal organization" by offering a platform for taxi rides without license (read: without the authorities earning money from the practice)
Nice one there.
Get the anti-gubermint crowd by emphasizing the criminal organization definition of Uber.
(YEAH! Fuck you Holland and your German laws! You don't get to decide what constitutes a legal definition of a criminal organization in your country!).
Then get the pro-regulation crowd by insinuating that paying taxes, tariffs etc. and submitting to regulation is somehow just a legal racket by "the authorities".
(YEAH! Fuck you regulatory gubermint bodies! I WANT to live in a Blade Runner-like dystopia. Minus the tech, replicants, flying cars, Vangelis soundtrack and unicorns.)
It's almost as if both the "anonymous reader" and Soulskill love watching their mom being double-teamed so much they just can't get the idea of getting it both ways out of their head.
What? It's a flamebait story and topic.
Decorum and protocol dictate the mention of management's and submitters Nazi whore mothers.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Dutch Taxis don't suck, it's a well regulated market, they're clean, consistent and safe.They're also well integrated into the public transport system. And Netherlands has a bunch of laws you have to comply with.
Uber has its own rules, and its own codes, and surge pricing and fake maps and god view spy app, and so on, and none of this fits in within the laws of the Netherlands.
There are car sharing companies that comply with Dutch law, e.g. GreenWheels is all across Holland. Uber just needs to stop behaving like babies and comply with taxi laws for their taxi service. (And lets not pretend that it isn't a taxi service, because no judge will be followed by that).
https://www.greenwheels.com/global/
> Oh, and nice bit of LOLbertarian bias in the summary.
*snort* :-)
I like the term "LOLbertarian". May I use it from time to time?
We've all been through it - can't get a cab. It's sometime AM, you need a cab and the driver refuses to take you. From my understanding of 'Common Carrier' law it is illegal for them to refuse a fare, just as much as it is illegal for Uber to operate.
Taxi operations are used to having all of the power and now that Uber has come along (despite some minor reservations I have with the service) I'm glad they are kicking the Taxi industries ass. I've noticed that now Taxis have improved their service because Uber is here.
I suspect that once Uber is gone - Taxi services will become much worse. If Uber is going to be banned then I would like to see the penalties for the Taxi industry increase because if they did what they were supposed to do, then Uber would not exist.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Enough of this bullshit. I don't care if Uber is the best thing since sliced bread -- they are breaking laws and deserve to be punished for it. They're not engaging in civil disobedience for the sake of human rights, they are unfairly competing with law-abiding businesses for the sake of profit. Laws need to be changed in the courts, not the streets.
Just because you like the service is no excuse to leave logic on the table and whine about the evil government interference of corporate greed.
Government has been struggling and failing miserably to organize taxi's in a decent way for so long. Now a great way to organize comes along and what do they do? Makes you think all that struggling was just to sell taxi licenses. The best solution would obviously be to buyback all the licenses and let everybody work through an Uber-like system. But that would cost money...
Thank you, Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and so many others, for courageously defending humanity, my freedom and more!
(...)"(read: without the authorities earning money from the practice)"(...) do they mean taxes? yeah what a nonsense this tax thing, lets let people build their own roads and charge for it... so we don't need them. Really sometimes I wonder what kind of reality some people live in.
Its terrible that this poor little multinational company, worth an estimated teeny tiny 50 billion, should be expected to obey local laws. SOMETHING MUST BE DONE TO STOP THE OPPRESSION!
In the netherlands, you have to obide by lots of safety regulations and consumer protection laws if you want to run a taxi service. Uber just blatantly ignores all that.
Screw them. With all their hippy speak about 'sharing'. They're just a taxi company trying to underpay their drivers and ignore the regulations.
"But they're a tech company, so it's a YRO issue!" Yeah right, they have an app. My local taxi service has a website, are thy a 'tech' company as well?
Europe is going extinct or replaced by real throat cutting criminal species. Who cares.
people will trot out Rosa Parks as an example. Funny, I never see them trot out Pablo Escobar or MS13.
This is Slashdot.
There's no 13 and MS is spelled M$. Tagged with a "Billgatus of Borg" icon.
In a story about M$ "just practicing civil disobedience". You know... like Mussolini.
HA! You thought I was gonna say Hitler.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
acting like criminal organizations in & out of their cars... truth + mercy = justice
Why should they be allowed to not pay taxes?
This comes the same day as Amazon announces an Uber like service for package deliveries to the home. Want something from Wall Mart? It will be waiting for the Uber driver to deliver it to your door.
I see Uber as some pricks driven by greed who are going to inspire laws that will make it illegal for passengers to put in for fuel money on long trips.
Ride sharing has been around for a very long time (even via the net) and has been fine, until now some leeches are getting involved, taking a cut and deliberately stirring up governments.
Your examples really are going way beyond overblown - civil rights movement, pentagon papers - are motherhood, apple pie and all the stars of the flag going to be mentioned next?
Do you expect to be taken seriously? Then maybe act as if you want to be taken seriously instead of all this overblown bullshit from ten miles beyond left field.
It's a bit much seeing them act like everywhere is a third world shithole with easily bribed officials, and even worse when it seems to be working.
If bribery works for anyone... then they are right, and your country is a third world shithole.
Instead of arguing about whether or not you live in a third world shithole, fix it.
The criminal business model is indeed one of the essential features of a criminal organization in the Netherlands, but that classification (art. 140 of the criminal code) has individual consequences only, as partaking in one carries a max jail sentence of 6 years (or 8 years for leaders).
The fact that Uber is incorporated is irrelevant for that classification (which may apply to anything from motorcycle gangs to taking part in Facebook-organized riots), although it will surely be prohibited for being an essential part of that criminal organization. First we will have to see whether the courts agree with this application of art. 140.
Freedom of the press is not the same as civil disobedience which is not the same as a company ignoring laws.
Point of order: there are no federal shield laws for journalists in the U.S.. Just because there is freedom of the press written into the bill of rights, does not mean that you can not be held legally accountable for what you print.
The common argument is "yelling 'fire!' in a crowded theater", which is commonly misinterpreted as stating that the yelling itself is illegal; it is not, it is protected by "freedom of speech"; the consequences *may* however be something you can have your ass thrown into jail over.
A freedom to do something is no protection from social enforcement of the consequences of you exercising that freedom. That is pretty much the very definition of "civil disobedience".
Rosa Parks was, in fact, arrested for her act of civil disobedience on 1 December 1955.
The very fact Uber simply skirted regulations and make their own rules is refreshing to those who hate government interference. But it also can bring with it as we have seen corruption, poor vetting of workers and a company that has no oversight to how it does things. Most times this eventually leads to problems and Uber has now become a problem for governments. I am all for the initial ideal of Uber but I think the company itself has risen too fast to properly manage its business model.
I think a Uber should be allowed to co exist with other traditional taxi services. But also it should abide by many of the same regulations. Otherwise its unfair competition.
Raid them.
And leave none alive.
They will remember this lesson for the next 100 years.
Not all 'disruptive' business models are socially beneficial. Not all social rules are evil.
It is being fixed where I live and Uber is getting fined and forced to play by the rules or get out so your insult is misplaced.
What was the point of your insult anyway? If you are just doing it to try to prove you are better than some stranger on the internet then that is a very pitiful state of affairs.
I continue to be baffled by how invincible Uber and Lyft seem to be internationally and nationally. They wilfully and openly break well established and, up until very recently, strictly enforced laws and yet seem to remain completely untouchable.
Any individual or local company that tried to launch Uber would be shutdown of face prison. It has happened countless times over the past few decades. Yet Uber simply feigns "interest in working with local authorities" and continues to flaunt the laws with impunity. It is absolutely astonishing for me to watch.
that the Dutch are so happy.
Could it be that state control over so many aspects of peoples' lives stifles innovation and turns entrepreneurs into criminals?
#FeelTheBern
these government protected taxi cartels need to be done away with! go Uber go
The "criminal organisation" is obviously the government extortion racket that is repeatedly invading the Uber offices in Amsterdam.
Oh, and nice bit of LOLbertarian bias in the summary.
The best bit FTA "A leaked copy of the rules for consultation"... which is available online, at https://consultations.tfl.gov.... , TfL
cheese :-)
See subject & "read em' & weep" Dave420 http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
* "EATING YOUR WORDS" != GOOD NUTRITION fool!
APK
P.S.=> How'd they taste, Dave420? Flavored with the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", & washed down with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH ramming them down?? LMAO @ U, fool... apk
See subject & "read em' & weep" Dave420 http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
* "EATING YOUR WORDS" != GOOD NUTRITION fool!
APK
P.S.=> How'd they taste, Dave420? Flavored with the "bitter taste of SELF-defeat", & washed down with your FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH ramming them down?? LMAO @ U, fool... apk
'sharing culture' is one of the most ridiculous terms used today. Uber drivers are not "sharing" their cars any more than a pizza delivery driver is "sharing" his/her car. Uber drivers are selling rides. They are selling their own time, and the running costs of their cars.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
I've taken Uber three times. First one was free.
Second ride had an estimate of $6 - 8. It was $35.
Third ride way under-estimated, too, with a similarly high charge.
A REAL TAXI would have been cheap for these short trips.
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
It's really interesting actually.
Is Uber technically illegal in many jurisdictions? Probably.
Yet, there are many ways to change the law and one of the ways is for a lot of people to just ignore it. That's what people do with laws they don't actually consider valid (drugs, various traffic laws...)
Heck, even governments just ignore the 'law' when they consider the courts too timid to intervene. Oh we can have a living constitution or reread the law in a different light to allow what we want to happen.
What Uber is doing is not that crazy relative to what goes on in most countries with all sorts of laws.
You can sit there are demand that UBER change the law and then operate. Well the same can be said about ObamaCare, drug laws, national security... Why don't these damn politicians change the laws clearly or amend the constitution before going ahead with their programs? That's the whole purpose of an amendment. Yet, rather than follow the process, they just proceed with their program knowing the courts are too timid to really enforce it or that they've decided to reinterpret the law to let it happen.
I like to see how this plays out, but I don't think Uber's approach is really all that different to how many of us (people, politicians, companies) approach regulatory type laws.
We tend to just ignore them and see how the powers that be respond. Heck, lots of people do drugs knowing the police won't really prosecute them unless something else happens.
Good on Uber I say. It kind of forces the government to change regulation to deal with it or turn a blind eye.
Uber customers are mobility-impaired cows. Cows say moo, moo say the cows, YOU UBER COWS, etc.
All these middle men companies are backed by the bank dogs. Make sure everyone is conditioned to accept being told they have no control over how they go somewhere, what they pay, and ultimately where they go in the end, or a company that dominates all accommodation so you're conditioned to have to validate yourself to stay somewhere and for them to be validated. It's no longer about a roof over your head, it's whether you're validated to have one. These are just thug, pusher companies. Their CEO's are witting/unwitting pawns but still just mere pawns.
/s "doing" "beating"
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
The message from Australia is "operate within the law" and each state has a right to pass different laws covering the operations of such services. To suggest that Uber are unaware of this or unable to adapt their systems to work within the differences between jurisdictions is dishonest. They have a right to lobby governments, as every other company and special interest group does, but they don't have the right to defy a government and it's laws. What is their game, Anarcho-capitalism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Ok, correction: they organize the taxi brance.
Thank you, Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and so many others, for courageously defending humanity, my freedom and more!
YOU say "hosts=bad" (they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE them vs. threats online:
"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)
Hypocrite - You admit using admin priv yourself & how else could I programmatically update hosts minus it inside Windows?
---
"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)
FACT:
Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best there is) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!
---
Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...
Oliver Day (Symantec) does too -> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...
MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...
---
* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS MORE DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUT OF YOU?
---
Those security pros INCLUDE ME too: I work w/ those guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!
I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (with ME showing you HOW to migrate a hosts file across an enterprise -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )
I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES http://www.bing.com/search?q=%... (you told me you learn from guides? I write them - good ones)
+ WARES TO DO IT that MILLIONS USE BEING PAID FOR IT -> http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn... )
You did all that? No & that's only a fraction of what I could put out.
APK
P.S.=> You're all TALK & can't back it -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" as far as security - I WROTE A GOOD PROGRAM PROS ENDORSE PROTECTING OTHERS you give me shit & SCREWUP as shown? Please!
...apk
YOU say "hosts=bad" (they add security, speed, & reliability) & bitch on admin privelege to UPDATE them vs. threats online:
"So, have you figured out why privilege escalation is a bad thing yet?" - by Coren22 on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @05:15PM (#50577809)
Hypocrite - You admit using admin priv yourself & how else could I programmatically update hosts minus it inside Windows?
---
"Of course it requires elevation to write to the hosts file" - by Coren22 (1625475) on Wednesday September 23, 2015 @05:35PM (#50585879)
FACT:
Even MalwareBytes AntiMalware (best there is) DEMANDS you use admin privelege (you saying it's "bad" too?) it can't do its job fully otherwise, like many security tools do!
---
Aryeh Goretsky NOD32/ESET says hosts = good security -> http://it.slashdot.org/comment...
Oliver Day (Symantec) does too -> http://www.securityfocus.com/c...
MalwareBytes' hpHosts hosts & recommends my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl...
---
* HOW MANY SECURITY PROS MORE DO I NEED TO KNOCK THE CHOCOLATE OUT OF YOU?
---
Those security pros INCLUDE ME too: I work w/ those guys from malwarebytes' hpHosts on a regular basis!
I've professionally worked for decades as a combined domain-wide network admin & software engineer since 1994 (with ME showing you HOW to migrate a hosts file across an enterprise -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... )
I've also been securing computers + WRITING GUIDES http://www.bing.com/search?q=%... (you told me you learn from guides? I write them - good ones)
+ WARES TO DO IT that MILLIONS USE BEING PAID FOR IT -> http://pcpitstop.com/news/winn... )
You did all that? No & that's only a fraction of what I could put out.
APK
P.S.=> You're all TALK & can't back it -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... & a "ne'er-do-well" as far as security - I WROTE A GOOD PROGRAM PROS ENDORSE PROTECTING OTHERS you give me shit & SCREWUP as shown? Please!
...apk
What's difference between Napster and Uber?
Are you sure there is no chance of something going on under that table? It looks a lot like me that in San Francisco Uber are doing something an individual would be fined for if they tried it. When a law is IGNORED for some and not for others that's a bit of a sign isn't it?
Where I am Uber has been hit with $1.7 million in fines so far and are just treating it as a cost of business - exactly as if they were paying bribes in a third world shithole. Such contempt for the law that others have to follow is annoying.
This is good news. Uber are a joke. We are making things a bit tougher for them in the UK too now. They claim to provide a service that fills the gap they call "transportation deserts". It's an utter lie - try and get an Uber outside of a main city and you will be waiting for long time. They are sucking the life out of established companies who employ drivers that don't reply of sub-standard satnav. I hope the Uber purge continues.
They want. ........a shrubbery!
They want. ........a shrubbery!