I agree that issues around regulatory capture could reach the point where civil disobedience becomes a kind of civil rights issue. That said, I suspect that yo

I agree that issues around regulatory capture could reach the point where civil disobedience becomes a kind of civil rights issue. That said, I suspect that you and I have deeply differing views on laws and regulations around how property can be developed and used. I live in what was designated as a "single family" residential area in San Francisco. It is a little expensive, and many people are starting to convert the garages into (probably illegal) in-laws. Paving over the front lawn to make a parking spot for the new tenant is also a common occurrence. Not surprisingly, families with children are having trouble competing on price with people who 1) don't have the burden of children, and 2) vastly increase their income by having tenants in what is now essentially a downstairs flat. I do think it is reasonable for neighborhoods to seek regulations against this kind of conversion - that doesn't mean I necessarily support it in all forms, but I don't necessarily see it as a vile law that should simply be disregarded as an act of civil disobedience. I suspect that airbnb is running afoul of laws that limit short-term rentals because neighborhoods want to remain "residential", that is, they don't want to become a neighborhood of vacationers. This issue comes up most in neighborhoods that are attractive to vacationers but still have a large local population (the left bank of paris, an arts district in santa fe, etc). It typically isn't an issue in a country club in palm springs (in fact, some of these communities have a rule against long term residents!) In short, I agree with you that cartels and regulatory capture can get to the point where civil disobedience is warranted, but I'm immediately skeptical of arguments that regulations designed to limit short term rentals fall under this category.