
App parking system shuts down in San Francisco - edward
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-28261843
======
crazygringo
There are many things that deserve to be public goods -- schools, libraries,
parks, restaurant health inspections, and so on.

But on-street parking in crowded urban areas with good public transportation?
Absolutely not. Why should I take the subway or bus, yet have my tax dollars
subsidize a select few who want to park on the street for free, or park for
less than a market-clearing rate?

This app is great because it highlights how much money the city, and therefore
taxpayers, are losing. I agree the app should be shut down, but only because
the city should build its own so it can take the money directly.

~~~
sillysaurus3
_I agree the app should be shut down, but only because the city should build
its own so it can take the money directly._

The poor can't afford smartphones. If your plan were implemented, how would
they find parking? If they aren't able to participate in your system, then
that will add a lot of time to their daily commute.

Poor people are already penalized for being poor due to overdraft fees,
predatory credit, etc. Taking an extra hour of their life each day just so the
wealthy can find parking more easily doesn't seem best.

~~~
webXL
If the poor can't afford smartphones, then they probably can't afford parking
violations either, and would probably do better using subsidized public
transportation than owning and maintaining a car, right?

~~~
evanb
Not if they work the night shift.

~~~
gweinberg
During the night shift there is probably parking available.

------
sehrope
Does anyone know of a city that has an open API for accessing whether or not
there are cars parked at it's metered spots[1]?

For cities that haven't switched to shared muni-meters, the existing parking
meters seem like the natural place to add hardware that checks for
availability. If the meters are network connected then at the very least they
could report back whether or not they are in use or "expired". A lot of the
newer meters allow for credit card payments so I'm assuming they have some
kind of network connectivity.

It'd be awesome if a city provided this data to the public. Then anybody could
just make an app/website[3] that shows the closest place you can park. Forget
trying to make a buck off of reselling your existing spot, the savings on
traffic, pollution, and frustration would justify it ( _less needless
circling_ ).

[1]: All spots would be even better but I'm assuming a spot that doesn't have
a meter isn't going to have any hardware there that could tell whether a car
is present.

[2]:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muni_Meter](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muni_Meter)

[3]: Or even better integration with your smart phone's existing maps/nav app.

~~~
boucher
San Francisco had real time information about a large percentage of it's
parking spots and it was available as an API. Apparently, though, this is no
longer the case:

[http://sfpark.org/how-it-works/open-data-page/](http://sfpark.org/how-it-
works/open-data-page/)

"As of December 30, 2013, the parking sensors in the street will be turned off
and their data feed will no longer be available as parking sensor batteries
have reached the end of their useful lives. This means that the real-time
information on parking space occupancy will not be available for mobile apps
and similar uses. The SFpark data feed and app will continue to show meter
parking rates, as well as real-time space availability and rates at parking
garages."

------
apsec112
I'm not a lawyer, but how can San Francisco _possibly_ have jurisdiction over
this? Could someone with more legal experience explain?

MonkeyParking is not located in San Francisco. MonkeyParking is not even in
the United States (the company is based in Rome, Italy). The founders aren't
US citizens. If the mayor of some random Iranian town demanded an American app
shut down, because locals were using it to coordinate protests against Islam
in violation of Iranian law, there's no way in hell an American software
company would listen. Do US courts simply claim that their laws apply to
everyone, everywhere?

~~~
andrewfong
The company intentionally targeted the San Francisco market. It's making
payments to and contracting with San Francisco residents. That's usually
enough to trigger jurisdiction. This isn't a uniquely American position to
take. The EU goes after American companies all the time for violations of EU
law.

The real issue is whether a judgment in another country can be enforced. If
MonkeyParking has any physical U.S. presence (bank accounts, servers, etc.),
San Francisco could try going after those items. They're an iPhone app, so SF
could certainly go after Apple. Assuming none of those options are available
to SF though, SF would have to go to an Italian court and ask that court to
enforce the U.S. judgment. At that point, whether the decision is enforceable
would hinge on international treaties and Italian law.

In your Iran hypothetical, Iran could certainly claim jurisdiction over an
American software company for intentionally violating Iranian law. But the
American First Amendment prohibits American courts from helping Iran enforce
that judgment.

------
mrgriscom
It seems like a more effective strategy than trying to lob legal threats at a
foreign corporation is to target the people actually using the app. Pass a
city ordinance with 100x damages for people who sell their public parking
spot. Run a few stings; write a few $1-2k tickets. Problem solved.

~~~
dap
It sounds like you're suggesting pursuing tens or hundreds of small offenders
whom many people would likely find sympathetic (caught in a sting -- for
taking $4 for telling someone about a parking spot?) instead of a single
offender that's making the whole problem possible. That approach depends on
publicity from the people you catch to dissuade other people, but that
publicity could be very negative for the city. Plus, you have to catch enough
people for it to be compelling.

~~~
mrgriscom
Well it just feels quixotic to me to sabre-rattle at some company in a place
you have absolutely no jurisdiction over. And to me the real douchebags are
the ones selling their parking spaces, so I'd welcome if they were the targets
of enforcement. And if busting them does rouse public sympathy, you have to
question if what they're doing should really be illegal.

Maybe I also didn't fully understand how this app works. I thought it was one
person camping out in their parking spot until the "buyer" arrives. If they
are merely selling the information that their spot is now available, it's
probably the same in practice, but the essence of it feels subtly different.
Law is fascinating like that.

------
joshuaheard
"San Francisco banned the use of the MonkeyParking app in late June declaring
that it would not allow the creation of a 'predatory private market for public
parking spaces'".

San Francisco: Only we can have a predatory market for public parking spaces.

~~~
ugexe
You do realize that this app meant the city is not charging enough (market
rate) for parking right?

~~~
untog
But is it in the public interest to charge market rate? That's the issue here.
Should poorer people in SF be unable to park anywhere? Is that a good use of
public resources?

~~~
jasonisalive
Attempts to artificially control prices for a scarce asset in the names of
protecting equality will always fail. Prices will inevitably rise to their
market level, the only difference is whether the owner of the good (the city)
will reap the full benefit of the transaction, or whether the fruits will be
split between (initially) secondary sellers and (later) law enforcement
efforts.

The most important effect is that the incentives that might have favoured
innovation to improve the efficiency of the use of the good and offer
affordable alternatives are distorted in favour of incentives which favour
unscrupulous competition for arbitrage gains.

~~~
curmudgeon224
Well - ignoring the fact that city maintained street parking is a public
resource - I believe you are ignoring the cost of _time_ (of the person
searching for parking) in your analysis which, in effect, creates a perfect
market equilibrium....or something.

~~~
jasonisalive
A scarce resource is a scarce resource. It doesn't matter what intentions it
was made with, or what rhetoric is used to justify a clearly defective pricing
strategy.

