3 ms·
I don't think sending someone to perform a task is the same as taking an order, though. The restaurant is still the one taking the order for the food itself in
by ratww 6y ago
I don't think sending someone to perform a task is the same as taking an order, though. The restaurant is still the one taking the order for the food itself in the case of a courier.
Also the law seem to only include "food delivery platforms", which exclude couriers.
(Of course, I might be wrong, but it seems that the intent of the law is to stop impersonation, not couriers).
- throwawaysea 6y agoWhy can't I pay someone to place an order and pick it up for me? Can't I have someone go shop on my behalf at non-restaurant businesses? And if so, isn't it reasonable that a menu of options be shown with items and the costs? I agree that there should be transparency about who is delivering the food, there should be no impersonation of the restaurant, no false listing of phone numbers, and so on. But allowing restaurants to deny a courier without prior agreement seems like a government overreach.
- ratww 6y agoI think you misunderstood my reply: I don't think the law is forbidding someone making an order on your behalf and picking it up for you. I doubt it will affect normal courier services. What I believe the law is forbidding is the lack of transparency, the false listing of phone numbers and taking orders on behalf of someone else. EDIT: Btw, I'm not downvoting you as I can't downvote replies. I have upvoted to counter it.