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.
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!
I mean I like Uber, it's great for me as a customer, but it ain't right. I'm willing to look the other way because of how scuzzy normal taxis in Boston are though.
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.
As a passenger, I don't give a shit who owns the car. There is one organization that sets all of the rules and all of the prices for all taxis. That's a monopoly. Uber drivers own their own cars too, but Uber is still a single organization. Just because a Taxi driver own's one medallion and one car doesn't make him any more independent than an Uber driver. That fact is precisely what this court case was about.
That's nice that you want all of that, but what you want isn't really all that important to society. It's more important that companies treat their employees properly, and play on a level playing field. Of course it's cheaper to take a Uber than a taxi: They don't pay the same taxes and fees that taxi companies pay, they don't pay their "employees" anywhere near what taxi companies pay, and they're fueled by dot-com bullshit money. While you make a great case for your own convenience, you have ignored the needs of everybody else involved in your (selfish) decisions.
I don't respond to AC's.
As a passenger, I don't give a shit who owns the car. There is one organization that sets all of the rules and all of the prices for all taxis. That's a monopoly. Uber drivers own their own cars too, but Uber is still a single organization. Just because a Taxi driver own's one medallion and one car doesn't make him any more independent than an Uber driver. That fact is precisely what this court case was about.
That "one organization" you are referring to is the local government. The next city over has another, completely separate "one organization" that sets the rules for all taxi companies that operate within it's jurisdiction.
I don't think you understand what monopoly means. Government regulation of an industry does not make it a monopoly.
"You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin