Slashdot Mirror
Uber Is About to Face a Landmark Battle in Europe (fortune.com)
In a case which could affect other app-based startups, Uber will seek to convince Europe's top court next week that it is a digital service, not a transport company. The outcome could determine whether app-based startups should be exempt from strict laws meant for regular companies. From a report on Fortune:The European Commission is trying to boost e-commerce, a sector where the EU lags behind Asia and the United States, to drive economic growth and create jobs. The U.S. taxi app, which launched in Europe five years ago, has faced fierce opposition from regular taxi companies and some local authorities, who fear it creates unfair competition because it is not bound by strict local licensing and safety rules. Supporters however say rigid regulatory obligations protect incumbents and hinder the entry of digital startups which offer looser work arrangements to workers in the 28-country European Union looking for more flexibility, albeit without basic rights.
Ebay will be called an auction place and have to abide by rules in every town.
Paypal will be called a bank and have to obey laws.
Every tech company figures they're semi avoiding laws at least cuz it is new. The motto in tech ask for forgiveness, not ask for permission. If you limit yourself, you might not ever have a good idea to make billions. I've had many ideas that turned into multimillion or multibillion dollar companies, but I didn't do them myself because I didn't have a crew to do them with. It doesn't bother me, but just reassuring that my ideas are good.
God spoke to me
Government LUDDITES STOMP on app appers who make apps! The overweening government can't app apps. Only the app appers can app apps!
Apps!
... it's pretty hard to not be considered a transport service. Whether or not it's a facilitator of independent contractors or a company is open for discussion but it's business plan (to me) seems to be disrupting taxis.
Microjobs are part of the economy of the future, and letting 19th century-style job laws stand in their way will only stifle the economy.
Disclaimer: I'm 34, have never had a job and am a virgin.
Supporters however say rigid regulatory obligations protect incumbents and hinder the entry of digital startups which offer looser work arrangements to workers in the 28-country European Union looking for more flexibility, albeit without basic rights.
See, these folks are spinning it as an opportunity for folks - "be your own boss!", "Be an entrepreneur!", etc ....
But they still rule your work. You still take on the business risk but aren't compensated for it. That's the trend - to push market and other business risks onto the worker - as well as the tax liability and hassle - and not compensating the worker for it.
A 25% commission and booking fee on top of that is way too steep for what they (Uber) do. They have no risk and very little expense while the drivers deal with the headaches of owning the capital equipment and taxes and whatnot. It's great that by becoming an Uber driver, you can skate around taxi regulations, but never the less, it's a bad deal. Uber just supplies an app and a payment system (BFD), but the drivers are the ones who are supplying the real service and capital equipment. I
I don't care about innovation. It does not bother me. Dogs, they bother me. They bark and bite. So I don't know about the government, but when I see dogs, I STOMP on them. I stomp on chihuahuas and I stomp on dobermanns. I stomp them flat. Stomp stomp stomp.
This is not a purely digital service where you're matching one digital asset to another. You're digitally procuring both sides of the service. Whether taxi medallions or services fees are acceptable are another topic generally, what's in dispute here is should an app that handles drivers, and digitally matches customers be subject to the same regulations as other providers in the industry.
You'll typically here no argument from me that taxi drivers are subject to some outdated rules and worrisome restrictions that make it hard to progress. However, consumers should not go full tilt towards the opposite direction either. Otherwise the next step is having an app where the plane is flown by the most voted pilot without an international license picked by those who are looking for the cheapest price. There is a middle ground, and I think Uber and Lyft have done a great job in clarifying that for most. Just don't go the other way in that a company who has a purely digital presence operating through contractors not being accountable for passenger safety.
This has a lot of ramifications far beyond convenience, don't let digital only enterprises separate physical law and digital law when as a customer both impact you and only one side impacts themselves. There is a middle ground between convenience and sensibility, but these days it's all to easy to forget until something goes wrong.
TL,DR: When Tesla automated cars go mainstream, do you find no fault in them for road safety because they're a purely digital company?
these laws and regulations exist for a reason, and it's not to put a stop to everybody's fun. It's because people were being abused.
If you let people ignore laws because you're changing nomenclature then there is no law. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Do individuals have the right to pick up people and offer them a ride for a fee, or does the government have the right do define a class of people with that right.
There is also the question of does the consumer have the right to decide what is in their best interest or does the government ?
Just because you organize your taxi service over the internet doesn't mean your exempt for all other laws, regulations, or requirements for a taxi service. This applies to every other dot com whose business model is basically "Do a business that has been around for decades, but using the internet!" AirBNB? You need to follow the same rules as any other room rental agency. Amazon? People buying things over the internet still need to pay sales tax. Backpage.com? Soliciting prostitution is still soliciting prostitution.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
They are arguing that they are a digital service company, but their actions in other markets and their business model development suggest the opposite. If they would only managed to stay in the sharing model as a digital pimp between two private, consenting parties (let the buyer/provider beware) instead of clearly branding themselves as a transport company..
they are obviously not an app company. They are not a tech company. They're like Microsoft in that they only make money and don't provide any tech. They are thieves, not tech.
remove the clause that says they can only work for uber - that will be 1 euro for the obvious solution
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a taxi service.
The real issue here is not whether Uber is a taxi service, but what regulations should apply to a taxi service?
If they are indeed a digital service, how about an EU-wide ban that blocks them from doing any kind of transportation or other non-digital service and activity they want to pick up. Let us see how well their digital service holds out for them on its own!
nice straw man, btw. What part of Uber is a ride share service? Uber is actively seeking drivers with the same techniques companies use to find employees. They're also treating those drivers exactly like employees. Crucially by controlling how much they charge and punishing them for refusing low paying rides. There are other ways though.
If they're going to treat people like employees when it's to their advantage they're also going to treat them like employees when it's to the drivers advantage. People literally died for those protections. In China and South America they're still dying. WTF is wrong with you that you'd turn a blind eye to that?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It has nothing to do with boosting e-commerce and startup culture.
This "we are an app company" is just like the software patent fiasco. Take a well-known process, add "with a computer" to it and file for a patent.
This is the same. Take an existing industry, add "with an app" to it - and pretend that everything that is true about that industry doesn't apply to you, because you are something completely new and different.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
You could say requiring restaurants to have stainless steel surfaces that can be cleaned properly and don't transfer dangerous bacteria prevents restaurants from progressing because it becomes immensely more expensive to open a restaurant.. yet you're not complaining about that.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
If I start up a service to connect Johns with women who are willing to serve them for money can I claim this as a "digital service" and not an escort company?
" Supporters however say rigid regulatory obligations protect incumbents and hinder the entry of digital startups which offer looser work arrangements to workers". I can't speak for all countries, but the requirement to be a taxi driver in germany is : 1) have a commercial insurance on the car 2) pass a governemental driving license exam 3) have "measured" counter for range counting to make sure the client is not ripped off 4) agree to have a minimum number of taxi at train station for people to easily get one and rule making so you can't refuse a course based on distance. Nothing in that protect incubent and hinder digital startup. They jsut do not want to respect the law because it cost money, whereas taking any joe blow from the street and pushing all risk on the client and driver cost nothing. They just want to cream up the thing without the cost.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
because Uber is paying way more than it needs to for it's drivers in order to establish itself. They're doing that with investor capital that will eventually dry up. If the necessary legal precedence is established by then expect your friends pay to be about 1/2 - 1/3 minimum wage. Also expect minimum wage laws to be irrelevant. I know it's a popular talking point that prices will go down when that happens, but ask yourself this: once Uber has established a price point why would they lower it? Competition? They'll do what all modern companies do when faced with competition: Mergers and Acquisitions.
I'm bringing China & South America into this because we're all human beings. No matter what we like to think we all do basically the same awful shit to each other when given the chance. I'm really hoping guys like you don't give them the chance. You're throwing away in a few years what took decades of struggle to build...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
We'll ensure their workers are unionised and screw their profits.