5 ms·
Do businesses have any recourse here? E.g. for the pizza situation - can a business ban DoorDash and its ilk?
by ed312 6y ago
Do businesses have any recourse here? E.g. for the pizza situation - can a business ban DoorDash and its ilk?
- WrtCdEvrydy 6y agoIt probably can't since people don't have to be honest about being DoorDash.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- coderholic 6y agoThe pizza business is the one making the profit here, at doordash's expense. It'd presumably be trivial for doordash to fix this, by checking the order amount against the cost. The article explains why they might not be doing that ("growth")
- xuki 6y agoThe problem is some customers received the pizza cold, and instead of blaming DoorDash, they blamed the restaurant. It's very misleading when DoorDash resell a product and pretend like the restaurant is actively participating in that process. I personally would not hesitate to ramp up the "self ordering", just to f* with DoorDash.
- coderholic 6y agoGotcha. You're talking about doordash pretending to be the restaurant, not the arbitrage problem.
- throwaway_dflka 6y agoIt's an interesting question. I suspect there's some trademark arguments to be made regarding confusion as to who is providing the product and service and whose failures any mistakes reflect. That kind of attribution, and the product quality it promotes, is one of the central purposes of trademark law. But there's also the first sale doctrine--that after you sell your physical product, people can do with it as they please, including resell. I suspect it comes down to how clear Doordash makes it that the restaurant is not involved in the service, but I'm not an expert in these areas, and this is obviously not legal advice.
- dbcurtis 6y agoBut doctrine of first sale does not extend to you fraudulently masquerading as the first-party seller.
- paulcole 6y ago> But there's also the first sale doctrine--that after you sell your physical product, people can do with it as they please, including resell. Yep! First sale doctrine applies to all transactions. This is why my gammy can resell her Oxy’s and it’s all nice and legal.
- throwaway_dflka 6y agoTo speak more precisely, the first sale doctrines prevent the original seller from asserting intellectual property rights (copyright, patent, trademark) as a basis to prohibit resell. I was writing an internet comment, not a legal brief!
- paulcole 6y agoSo then first sale has nothing to do with Doordash’s food delivery service right?
- throwaway_dflka 6y agoIt's an obstacle to suing Doordash for trademark infringement, which is what you would typically do when someone is doing business in your name without your permission.
- judge2020 6y agoIf delivery people are paying with the Doordash debit card (most likely for non-partnered restaurants) you might be able to ban that BIN number (YMMV but it is possible with Stripe Radar + Stripe Terminal), or you could instruct your cashiers to refuse service to doordash drivers based on what card they use. After DoorDash receives enough reports from their drivers/customers it'd probably be delisted.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoThis would be key for restaurants to do, in DoorDash’s largest markets.
- miked85 6y agoIn-N-Out has done this: https://www.foodandwine.com/news/n-out-doesnt-want-anyone-delivering-their-burgers-your-doorstep https://www.foodandwine.com/news/n-out-doesnt-want-anyone-de...
- toomuchtodo 6y agoI enjoy that In-N-Out is still proceeding with the suit even though DoorDash has taken down the advertising in question. Have to send a message.