Atlanta introduces bill to regulate Uber and Lyft

http://clatl.com/freshloaf/archives/2014/02/05/the-gold-dome-bill-to-regulate-uber-and-lyft-has-been-introduced-and-its-a-doozy

by jaldoretta • 12 years ago

28 49 12 years ago

clatl.com

_wp3r6• 12 years ago

I am not sure this legislation is terrible. Requiring GPS billing be certified, drivers be insured, drivers be licensed, and some of the other general consumer protections seem pretty sensible. I also did not see anything in the legislation that related to minimum rates as the article implied.

It actually does seem like a decent first draft.

outside1234• 12 years ago

The disallowing internet apps seems dumb. Seriously, if I could flag a regular cab with a general purpose app that would be about 95% of the value of Uber to me.

I'm sort of baffled why someone like Yellow Cab doesn't just put out an app.

_wp3r6• 12 years ago

The use of Internet or cellular telephone software to calculate rates shall not be permitted unless such software complies with and conforms to the weights and measures standards.

Not disallowed just have to show your app is measuring properly.

greg5green• 12 years ago

At least here in Columbus, Yellow Cab does have an app for that: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/id628065359?mt=8 or https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.apcurium.M...

With all the crazy laws surrounding taxis and liveries, I wouldn't be surprised if an app like that is illegal in some municipalities.

pmorici3• 12 years ago

It doesn't matter if it is an app or a phone call there is a culture in the Taxi industry of just ignoring calls for a pick-up in certain areas that they view negatively. Uber and Lyft don't discriminate like that.

bbanyc2• 12 years ago

That's pretty much what Hailo is. It's not yet as widespread as Uber though.

ig1• 12 years ago

There is one: https://www.hailocab.com

polarix4• 12 years ago

The premise of these companies is essentially that one doesn't need licensing for drivers if the system keeps a reputation history. This bill makes that explicitly illegal. The companies will no longer be able to serve that jurisdiction.

_wp3r6• 12 years ago

Can you not keep a reputation history for drivers that have a license?

couradical2• 12 years ago

I too was surprised at Uber's tone. I mean, requiring commercial drivers to have a commercial insurance policy and ensuring that the measured rates are accurate as measured by a neutral 3rd party are only things that could help differentiate Uber's service. Plus, unless they have posted per-mile or per-hour livery rates, Uber's pitch as a private, centrally dispatched livery/transport service should make their pricing manipulations okay.

I actually almost hope this passes?

jeffdavis2• 12 years ago

Uber always sends you an exact map of your route. You can verify the billing yourself or prove to a third party that the billing is miscalculated.

patcon3• 12 years ago

I'm with you on insurance and licensing, but "certified GPS billing" seems backward. Imagine the app is open source and people are not complaining about suspicious behaviour or billing patterns in the reputation ranking system -- why would this be necessary?

_wp3r6• 12 years ago

Would you buy gas at a pump that was not certified? Do you check to see if your pump was certified when you get gas? Would the rank and file consumer verify the routing measurements of an app or even know how or have the tools to accurately do so?

jerf• 12 years ago

Introducing some consumer protection measures back into the Uber model may make sense, depending on how it is done. Writing into the law that the only way to ever provide any taxi service ever is exactly and only the exact way it is done today, by what today is de facto a cartel, does not make sense. Since this law is doing a bit of both, it's hard to give a snap summary of goodness or badness, but on the whole, I'd rather do nothing and wait a bit more for real problems to arise before I write into the legal code the impossibility of ever again innovating in the field of taxi-like transportation. (Especially with driverless cars metaphorically just around the corner. Whatever regulation may be desirable there, nobody's currently in a position to write it.)

It is not clear to me that Uber is a huge problem for anybody but an industry being disrupted yet, and that is not only not a crime, it's a feature of the system. (Feel free to correct me in replies, if you like; this is not a permanent state of mind. It really is not clear to me right now that Uber is a significant danger to anyone but existing taxi companies. I've heard a couple of anecdotes, but so far the taxi industry is well able to keep up with "anecdotes" of how they do bad things too, so calling it a "wash" would probably be doing the current incumbents a pretty big favor....)

JackFr2• 12 years ago

This highlights the fact that Uber and Lyft are not disrupting so much as exploiting regulatory arbitrage. That is, for all intents and purposes they are taxis, but they are attempting to ignore licensing, regulatory and fee requirements

matthewmcg• 12 years ago

Agreed, but they also should make us examine the regulation of taxi services more skeptically.

polarix4• 12 years ago

Yes. They've helped us find that: no, once we have a reputation economy, we don't need the government to tell us who we can safely get in a car with.

JackFr2• 12 years ago

I don't know -- that seems naive. This is not a new story.

From the Wikipedia entry on Guilds: As Ogilvie (2004) shows, the guilds negatively affected quality, skills, and innovation. Through what economists now call "rent-seeking" they imposed deadweight losses on the economy. Ogilvie says they generated no demonstrable positive externalities and notes that industry began to flourish only after the guilds faded away. Guilds persisted over the centuries because they redistributed resources to politically powerful merchants. On the other hand, Ogilvie agrees, guilds created "social capital" of shared norms, common information, mutual sanctions, and collective political action. This social capital benefited guild members, even as it hurt outsiders.

The heyday of guilds lasted from around 1200 to 1700...

crazy1van• 12 years ago

Yes, but the taxi companies aren't arguing that their regulations should be relaxed. They are arguing that they should apply to more people -- especially these new services like Uber that are doing well.

vampirechicken• 12 years ago

Regulation of industry creates government jobs. The governing body will not relinquish its regulatory capacity without a fight. The taxis are more likely to get Uber regulated then they are to get themselves deregulated. Rememebr that the government is itself an interested party. It isn't Uber Vs. Taxis. Its a triangle.

Shivetya• 12 years ago

well ask yourself this, how many jobs and services performed by people should require the permission of a governing agency? Far too many such agencies only exist now to restrict competition. Heaven forbid you try to get into the taxi business, or worse the moving business.

As in, where does it stop or where do we begin? Florist? Movers? Hairstylist? Nail care? Plumber?

_wp3r6• 12 years ago

All of the companies you listed already have licensing requirements.

rayiner2• 12 years ago

How about you argue the issue at hand on its own merits instead of introducing red herrings? Taxis aren't like nail care. In many cities, particularly Atlanta, they serve as an important extension of the public transportation network, and are core to tourism and commerce. Heck, taxis are the reason why bars in the city, most of which are accessible only by car, can even pretend that they don't cater mostly to people who drink then drive.

Taxi services aren't regulated for the sake of limiting competition. They are given a monopoly in return for agreeing to be regulated as quasi-extensions of cities' transportation infrastructures.

gamblor9562• 12 years ago

Counterpart: Live in a jurisdiction which does not regulate any of the above and you'll quickly realize why all Western countries do so.

It's not about restricting competition, it's about very real concerns that are addressed by specific licensing regimes for each such industry. Tort law and market competition are useless, alone or together, in regulating low-entry-cost industries with high potential externalities. Licensing imposes capital requirements which make tort law and market competition feasible, along with guaranteeing certain other benefits to customers that increase the potential market of the industry.

ynniv2• 12 years ago

Atlanta introduces bill to shut down Uber and Lyft is not an appropriate re-titling of this article.

polarix4• 12 years ago

Why not? That's clearly the point, and that's why it's relevant to this community. I suppose it should probably be in the passive voice, but that's a nit.

ynniv2• 12 years ago

The article does not claim this, and the parts of the bill that the article highlights do not appear to unduly target new services. The only statement claiming that Uber is being targeted is in an included quote from Uber itself. If someone would like to have a title that makes this claim, they can write their own post and submit that.

k-mcgrady• 12 years ago

I think protocol on HN is to use the title associated with the article, not to create your own - even if it seems better.

atwebb• 12 years ago

That's not clearly the point. It may be inferred but it's hardly clear. The 1k license seems a bit excessive but some of the other points, registering, abiding by current mileage standards, having insurance...all seem completely valid and like places Lyft and Uber are taking advantage of missing regulation and, to some extent, rider's ignorance of the situation they are in if there's an accident or some other mishap.

Major_Grooves• 12 years ago

Hailo takes the strategy of working with existing licensed taxis so presumably they would be ok?

Alex3917• 12 years ago

Fine by me, Uber is a scam company. Here is an email I got from them today.

Subject (large text): "Explore NJ this weekend with FREE uberX rides"

Body (small text): "NJLOVESuberX covers rides beginning OR ending in New Jersey, up to $20. Believe us – at these rates, $20 will get you far."

Fine print (tiny text): "Please note that there is a $20 surcharge for trips between New Jersey and NYC."

Atlanta introduces bill to regulate Uber and Lyft

Related Stories