
Uber Is Dealt a Fresh Blow in European Legal Case - kawera
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/04/business/uber-ecj-europe-france.html?pagewanted=all
======
friedman23
What is the saying, "Cutting off the nose to spite the face"? As Europe
continues to add laws and regulations targeted at American tech companies they
will further prevent any innovative businesses from growing and thriving in
Europe. Also before you respond, I am really not interested in legalist
arguments, especially when the laws themselves were designed by and for
entrenched interests.

It's been 17 years since the internet has become widespread, how many
successful information technology companies have come from Europe, a continent
with 500 million people, many of them well educated? Maybe it's time to look
inward.

~~~
pilsetnieks
There are Uber-like services in Europe that somehow still manage to comply
with the law, while bringing the same benefits to the end user. You don't have
to ride roughshod over regulations and worker protections to be innovative and
thriving.

~~~
imrehg
I'd be curious to know any examples that really bring the same benefits
(usability and features mostly, less about the price), I was looking for them,
and couldn't find any (e.g. in London at the moment). Otherwise it's just hand
waving argument...

~~~
jerven
I use both Uber and TaxiPhone app in Geneva Switzerland. The taxi phone app is
better because it is more honest, no fake cars in the TaxiPhone app driving
"in the middle of lake geneva (along the pedestrian ferry routes)" while the
Uber app has dubious arrival times and while payment is straightforward
nothing about the app is really better.

While the taxiphone app is branded Geneva it also works in other cities.
Basically, it is a locally branded app but the infra is in 42 cities/regions
and works in the "foreign" ones.

Uber is a bit cheaper during the night, but not always during the day and
certainly not during rush hours in the city center.

Address search could be a bit better but otherwise it is as good as the uber
one. At least it doesn't have this annoying inbuilt Dev recruitment tool, that
stupidity almost ruined the day of a blind developer I know.

When booking a ride ahead of time e.g. to the airport with family the
taxiphone website is best. You can arrange child seats etc.. and they will
have them and arrive on time.

------
Oletros
No, the opionion doesn't say that Uber should be treated as a taxi service,
the opionion says thet UberPop should be treated as a transport service, not
an information society services.

------
Piccollo
Hurray.

~~~
CamperBob2
Unless you own taxi medallions, I don't really see much cause for celebration.
Unnecessary regulation is unnecessary.

Edit: due to aggressive rate limiting on HN's part, I'm not able to respond to
those who have chosen to reply rather than downvote. What I'd say in such a
reply is this: despite all of the advantages of regulated taxi services that
people are citing, rideshare services are still winning in the marketplace.
Have you ever thought about possible reasons for that?

Clearly people aren't being forced to use Uber, and just as clearly, they
shouldn't be forced _not_ to.

~~~
k-mcgrady
Taxi drivers in my European country are subject to some requirements that make
a lot of sense and help keep people safe. I've user Uber a lot and it's great
but anything to up the quality of drivers is good. I've been down one way
streets multiple times in Uber's, I've been in multiple near-misses, I've
never had these things happen to me in taxi's. Not all taxi drivers are great
either but the even the bad ones are better than the average Uber driver.

Obviously this is all city specific but I think a valid counter point to the
'unnecessary regulation' argument at least where I live.

~~~
stale2002
If you really believe this, then why not let consumers decide for themselves
which transportation services that they want to use?

If all these rules and regulations are so awesome, then consumers will
overwhelming choose to buy from companies that follow them.

Thats how markets work.

~~~
Veratyr
Because individuals won't make decisions that benefit society as a whole.
They'll make decisions that benefit themselves and themselves alone.

People will simply use whatever's cheapest and easiest without much thought
into anything else.

~~~
CamperBob2
So, all I have to do to impose my will on you is to insist, backed by little
to no evidence, that highly-regulated taxis "benefit society" more than less-
regulated rideshare services do. Correct?

It seems that the people who determine what does and does not "benefit
society" have a significant amount of unwarranted power. If this weren't true,
we wouldn't be seeing cases like this one where the people -- the same ones
that supposedly make up the democracy in question -- insist on using
unauthorized/illegal rideshare services.

If your response to my reasoning is, "Well, it's a democracy after all,
they're getting what they voted for," then the contradiction is too obvious to
bother pointing out.

~~~
Veratyr
My point was intended more as a general one, that you can't simply assume what
the market chooses is actually the best choice, as individual market
participants have different priorities to the collective.

> So, all I have to do to impose my will on you is to insist, backed by little
> to no evidence, that highly-regulated taxis "benefit society" more than
> less-regulated rideshare services do. Correct?

No, the regulations predate Uber. Uber needs to either change the law through
lobbying or adhere to it.

> It seems that the people who determine what does and does not "benefit
> society" have a significant amount of unwarranted power. If this weren't
> true, we wouldn't be seeing cases like this one where the people -- the same
> ones that supposedly make up the democracy in question -- insist on using
> unauthorized/illegal rideshare services.

> If your response to my reasoning is, "Well, it's a democracy after all,
> they're getting what they voted for," then the contradiction is too obvious
> to bother pointing out.

What we have isn't democracy, it's _representative_ democracy, which addresses
exactly the problem I was originally making. The masses can't be expected to
make informed decisions on everything that concerns them, so they elect a few
people who can on their behalf.

When an average person decides Uber vs. Taxi, in the 10s or so they spend
thinking about it, they're not considering the impact it'll have on the local
economy, the safety features of the vehicle, the qualifications the driver is
required to have or the regulations they're required to adhere to. All your
average person thinks about is that the Uber app is already on their phone,
the car will arrive quickly and in the grand scheme of things, the likelihood
of something bad happening is small.

Elected representatives will listen to experts, consider the wider impacts of
their decision and do their best to make a decision that benefits their
constituents. Sometimes that decision will conflict with what their
constituents would choose themselves.

~~~
CamperBob2
And people wonder why a Reagan or a Trump or a Brexit appeals to so many
voters.

Just because you _can_ regulate something doesn't mean it's always a net win
for society to do so. The EU definitely seems to have missed this particular
clue.

------
Shivetya
so can anyone speak to what it entails to gain a taxi license? is this a
burdensome requirement on those who want to drive? I have no issue with
requiring specific insurance as anyone driving for any ride share service is
just risking too much without proper coverage.

in the US far too much occupational regulation/licensing only serves now to
protect current providers effectively locking out or deterring competition.

~~~
orf
In London they have to pass a test called "the knowledge"[1]. It's the
"hardest taxi test in the world" and quite impressive. It ensures taxi drivers
actually know what they are doing and where they are going, not just blindly
following their GPS.

> To become an All-London taxi driver or Green badge holder you need to master
> no fewer than 320 basic routes, all of the 25,000 streets that are scattered
> within the basic routes and approximately 20,000 landmarks and places of
> public interest that are located within a six-mile radius of Charing Cross.

> It takes the average person between 2 and 4 years to learn the knowledge, a
> lot however depends on how much time and effort they are willing to dedicate
> in learning it.

1\. [https://www.theknowledgetaxi.co.uk/](https://www.theknowledgetaxi.co.uk/)

~~~
bogomipz
>"In London they have to pass a test called "the knowledge"[1]. It's the
"hardest taxi test in the world" and quite impressive. It ensures taxi drivers
actually know what they are doing and where they are going, not just blindly
following their GPS."

I am familiar with "the knowledge" and while I think it's indeed impressive
and I frankly I prefer taxis drivers that have local knowledge however is this
still practical in 2017?

I am asking sincerely. Certainly "the knowledge" doesn't include local traffic
conditions a la Waze.

~~~
orf
> I am asking sincerely. Certainly "the knowledge" doesn't include local
> traffic conditions a la Waze.

Experience provides that, I guess. Waze is perhaps better in US grid style
systems with lots of large, laid out roads but In London the streets are tiny
and the traffic patterns very different. I think the traffic follows in a
predictable ebb and flow pattern based on the week day and time, which you can
pick up easily enough if you spend all day in it.

I've seen the Google maps traffic display in London and it's not terribly
useful: all red everywhere at peak times, yellow/green off-peak.

It's anecdotal, but in London every taxi experience has been superior from a
directions point of view. Uber sometimes gives drivers crazy directions that
make no sense and the drivers just go along with it. That being said, Uber is
a fair bit cheaper so it's all a trade off I guess.

Fankly, if I've got money I don't mind spending it on a black cab, I see it
similar to supporting local businesses over buying off Amazon - a good idea
for smaller purchases, but the discounts on larger items are often too good to
turn down.

~~~
bogomipz
Sure, I am quite familiar with the narrow Victorian streets in London and
agree that that knowledge is certainly and asset but having knowledge of those
doesn't tell me if there's road work or an accident on them until it's too
late. That's all I meant.

I agree that the level of professionalism of a London cabbie provides a
comfortable experience. Certainly to to that of a Yellow cab driver in NYC.
And this is one of those issues for me. Taxi drivers in NYC have no regard for
blocking an intersections, blocking cross walks, running red lights and
blowing the horn incessantly. The Uber/Lyft driver on the other hand seems to
do these quite rarely. It's seems to be a much more considerate experience for
both the passengers and pedestrians. I do certainly see the danger though if
cities losing their cabs and Ubert/Lyft just becoming the new entrenched
player.

