Slashdot Mirror
EU's Top Court Rules That Uber Is a Transportation Company (axios.com)
Uber is a taxi company, according to a landmark ruling from Europe's highest court. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled Wednesday that the U.S. ride-hailing app is a transportation firm and not a digital company. The verdict is a long-awaited judgment expected to have major implications for how Uber is regulated throughout Europe. From a report: The E.U.'s member countries now have more clarity and authority to regulate Uber as a transportation company (more strictly than as a tech service), though many already do so. As a technology company, Uber would have been protected by E.U. law from certain restrictions by individual countries, and would have required them to notify the commission of any new regulations.
Shout out to Comcast for my high-speed lane to swish-dit!
Bazinga!
...European court rules that Uber is a pathological liar for claiming to be a tech firm in the first place.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
By any other word would smell as weird;
So Uber would, were he not Uber call'd,
Retain that dear taxes which he owes
Without that title. Uber, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all regulations.
By their logic e-trade can't be regulated as a stock brokerage business. They are just a technology platform that connects sellers and buyers.
Another one in the face for those silicon valley arsewipes who's idea of "disruption" is destroying established businesses through undercutting and paying as little as possible to both employees (yes, they are in the EU) and the taxman.
Tell you what bro's - if you don't want to pay tax how about you don't use any facilities paid for out of tax revenue? That would be , oh, most roads in the world I suspect!
In other news.. water is wet.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
And 7 billion people say 'duh' (or whatever 'duh' is in their respective languages - please educate me what duh is in your language).
I think the whole world knew they were a transport company not a digital company. They've just been trying to use loopholes to avoid being regulated.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
But why won't you think of all the children that would have worked in the buggy whip industry !. You monster taking away jobs from the buggy whip artisans.
You must contimually appeal to your constitution or sue for your liability to a contract.
The legislative perview for the concept of registration pertaining to veehicles is that only servile conduct (privileged driving) qualifies as a common carrier; of youaren't in sercices then you are at liesure public law enjoying your Right to Public Vehicular Travel no different than a non-registered bicycle. Calif. ex. 1925 46th legislature "An act to provide a license fee dorall persons involved in the transportation of cargo or passengers for hire, compensation or profit." Calif veh code clearly establishes a debtor and creditor standing to oblige a driver for the duties.
As much as i like technological disruption, i dislike disrupters that do it for more money.
Businesses don't tend to last very long paying more than necessary in wages or taxes.
That's not a valid excuse for paying less than required/necessary.
What are the chances a taxi company would be considered a transportation company?
The mind boggles at such a concept.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
I've used Uber once or twice and I struggle to see much of a difference between their business model and that of private hire companies (private hire taxis being similarly licensed by authorities, but different than 'official' taxis).
Private hire / radio cabs:
- Operate on a pre-booked basis only (you cannot stop one in the street).
- Are booked by speaking to an operator, who co-ordinates the drivers affiliated with their firm.
- Comes to you and the driver gives you a call to let you know he has arrived.
It seems that Uber's technology largely replaces the role of the operator. Their business model is hardly new or unique (in the UK and Europe), and their automation of part of the process, using an app and some servers, is to be applauded but doesn't negate the fact that they are simply a big private hire firm.
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
for load-balancing scheduling.
Uber owns nothing, the occupational Vehicle-Code regulated driver is liable to Uber only for member purposes and is only an agency of government.
In other words....government finds a way to get in and mess up something that has been innovative, proven popular and successful.
You mean a company that has been losing money at a clip of $500 million every month with no signs of profitability even in the face of ignoring the law to save money and grow. Yeah, SUPER successful... [/sarcasm]
Good thing govt wasn't this bad a 100 or so years ago....we'd otherwise still have a thriving buggy whip industry.
Peculiar view of how wonderful the world was 100 years ago. 100 years women weren't allowed to vote, minorities (particularly blacks) were subject to Jim Crow laws which wouldn't end for another 50 years, the Fair Labor Standards Act wouldn't be passed for another 20 years, etc.
This notion that government is always bad is in stark denial of reality.
ARRL Field Day, only members bring their equipment.
Who are the people if the people are said owners of the roads?
Does Garmin or Magellan become liable for traffic jams?
But all of the hipsters keep telling me we're in a "sharing economy," now. How can it be a transportation company if they're just facilitating people sharing with each other.
Also, let me share some vomit at the absurd mis-use of that word.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
When all you have is a libertarian hammer, every problem looks like a government nail.
Truer words have rarely been said. The notion of keeping government out of things were it isn't competent or helpful is a very reasonable principle. Problem is that like everything else some people take it too far - basically to the point of being a religion.
Governments are not always bad nor are they always good
Governments can be a force for positive change if carefully watched
Governments will be a force for terrible things if not carefully watched
There are some things governments do better than the private sector and vice versa
The government is necessary and competent for FAR more than just policing and contract enforcement
The private sector is generally terrible at doing anything that does not or should not involve a short term profit motive
Raising taxes is sometimes necessary and proper and beneficial to society. To pretend otherwise is just naked greed.
Freedom doesn't mean the absence of government.
They considered a few other options to classify Uber, like a mid-sized sedan, swamp gas, camera smudge, or man in ape suit.
http://dilbert.com/2010-12-13
In other words, the government wants to have control over Uber instead of free enterprise.
As a frequent traveler, this is bad news.
In the past, I've always used taxis. They can be hard to get, often late, don't keep up with the technology, often require cash (despite some laws that require them to take credit cards). Obviously, some places are better than others due to any number of factors but I don't always get to choose where I go.
Using an app to get a ride (I use Lyft when I can) is so much easier. You know the cost up front, when the driver will be there, and can even see where they are on the map. The desire to get high marks from passengers results in nice clean cars, cellphone chargers, and politeness (OK, not all the time, but I have a really easy way to report back to the company if they are bad).
And then the price is better. Sure, the difference is not going to make or break a customer or company but these things add up in a budget.
While I see the point of taxis being regulated in the same way as other drivers, the reality will be that a bunch of slowly changing regulations that will cripple being able to have a quick, inexpensive, and pleasant ride just to support an old horse drawn buggy system.
london knowledge test is a good idea and GPS boys are clueless + the GPS info is off at time like have you turn the wrong way down a road.
Perhaps a non-US company should ognore the laws in the US. E.g selling beer to people looking at the age limit in the country of origin. ABInBev would be a nice start
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Maybe it is the RULES themselves that need changing...break the monopolies that the taxi companies have had all these years, and force the entrenched companies to compete, and perhaps we'd see marked improvement on the taxis that are available.....
Maybe they do need to change. Uber doesn't get the right to decide that unilaterally. You don't tear down a fence unless you understand why it was built in the first place. If Uber wants to lobby to change the laws to something (hopefully) better I have no problem with that.
I mean because right now, a taxi cannot compete on cleanliness, promptness or price with Uber. They have no incentive to at this time.
Uber is losing money a breathtaking pace (hundreds of millions per month) so let's not pretend that Uber is selling their services for more than they actually cost to provide. I can provide great service for a while at less than it costs but sooner or later that has to end. Uber is well funded but it's not clear they are actually more economically efficient.
The Knowledge is only for black cab drivers, not mini cabs.
It's like saying that dating websites are brothels.
EU bureaucrats are imeciles.
I hope EU collapses soon.
Lyft is screwed ! And every other would-be gig-economy-based ride service.
Drivers are screwed. Passengers are screwed.
Bad for Europeans...
It's like saying that DATING WEBSITES are BROTHELS.
EU bureaucrats are imbeciles.
I hope EU collapses soon.