8 ms·

I think you could make a similar argument for YouTube, but I personally find all of these services to be tremendously valuable and I'm glad that they are workin

by paul 12y ago

I think you could make a similar argument for YouTube, but I personally find all of these services to be tremendously valuable and I'm glad that they are working to evolve the law. Laws are written and interpreted within the context of old, established businesses. Innovation will inevitably produce a certain amount of tension with those old laws. One approach for to dealing with this is to ask permission / change the law first, but that will usually fail because the incumbent businesses generally don't like change (imagine trying to get Hollywood's permission to launch YouTube). The second approach is to move forward within the spirit of the law, deliver genuine value to consumers and society, and then work with legislatures and the courts to develop improved laws and understandings of the law.

7Figures2Commas 12y ago
First, the YouTube comparison is far less appropriate than you suggest. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act contains a safe harbor that is designed to shield internet service providers from liability associated with copyright infringment provided that they meet certain criteria. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit determined that YouTube was protected by this safe harbor. Second, and more importantly, you seem to neglect the fact that some AirBnB hosts are not just violating laws, but their leases and HOA rules. These are legally-binding contracts between private individuals. AirBnB's most ardent supporters like to focus on zoning and hospitality laws, suggesting that they're antiquated, anti-competitive, etc. Some of these arguments are quite reasonable in my opinion, but what about private contracts? I have yet to see convincing arguments around the issue of hosts who are violating their contracts with their landlords and/or homeowners associations. Most apartment leases have strict terms around subletting and many HOAs have restrictions around property use that would be in conflict with AirBnB-style short term rentals. Even if AirBnB doesn't have a legal obligation to help enforce these, given the number of listings that are ostensibly governed by leases and/or HOA rules, it seems implausible that AirBnB isn't aware that a good number of its hosts are breaking private contracts, potentially exposing those hosts, their neighbors and even their "guests" to a variety of risks. Does AirBnB not have a moral obligation to address this? I'd love to see more AirBnB supporters take on this issue. At least it would be more entertaining and perhaps even more enlightening than the recurrent arguments against zoning and hospitality laws.
- nostromo 12y ago
  Why is it Airbnb's job to police their listings for HOA and lease violations? Surely that responsibility is the host's.
  - DanBC 12y ago
    How does US insurance work? Some people are not going to be covered by insurance during a sub-let. Those people might be the host or guest or apartment owner; but in the case of catastrophe someone is going to lose out. So there is some value to customers of having listings vetted by AirBnB so that everyone knows that the sub-let is legal and insured.
  - doxcf434 12y ago
    Hardly Airbnb related either, here's a response I got back from a craiglist ad for a temporary sub-lease (that I declined): > My place is available for the whole month of June, and is located at xxxx. Subletting isn't technically allowed at the building, so you would need to be careful around the staff.
  - 7Figures2Commas 12y ago
    I was expecting a response like this, and it completely misses the point of my comment. Notwithstanding the potential benefits to hosts and guests in ensuring that activity on AirBnB is above board, I focused on a simple question: even if AirBnB doesn't have a legal obligation to help enforce private contracts, does AirBnB not have a moral obligation to address the issue because it is almost certainly aware that a good number of its hosts are violating them? It seems like your response is "AirBnB has no moral obligation to try to discourage its hosts from violating an agreement it knows likely exists", but I'm curious as to why you chose to throw this back to me as a question rather than stating a concrete opinion. Do you hold other companies to this same standard, and are you comfortable stating on record that what's good for the goose is always good for the gander? If so, why disguise your opinion as a question? On the point of corporate morality, I'd note that companies in certain industries are frequently lambasted for acting amorally. Just look in finance. Big banks, mortgage lenders, hedge funds, high frequency traders. They face almost constant criticism for engaging in behavior or failing to prevent behavior, even when their actions do not violate the letter of the law. Are there no AirBnB supporters who have criticized other companies for amoral behavior?
tptacek 12y ago
I find Airbnb tremendously valuable as well (Airbnb is probably hooking me up in London early next week, after I finish spending this week in a Scottish house I also rented through an online service). And I'm sort of addicted to Uber as well. That doesn't make either of those services any less fraught. They can be incredibly valuable to me and a net negative for the communities they operate in. Not everything that makes me happy is good for society.
- baddox 12y ago
  > They can be incredibly valuable to me and a net negative for the communities they operate in. That is at least as true of government as it is of companies that bend or break regulations.
- harimau 12y ago
  Curious: why choose to pay instead of using a free service like couchsurfing.org?
  - vvvv 12y ago
    I wouldn't call CS a "free service". It's supposed to be more of a community. It's great for meeting people and learning their way of life, but if I travel on business or when I know I won't have much time to spend with the host, I find alternative accommodation.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    There's four of us traveling together. We're not looking for spare rooms. :)
  - icebraining 12y ago
    Personally, I prefer paying (cash), because it changes the nature of the situation. As a free guest, you are - or can be - expected to participate in the hosts' events, such as meals, touring the city, etc. That may be great, and I might still want to do it, but I'd rather keep my options open in case I don't get along with them or I have different plans.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

by paul 12y ago

7Figures2Commas 12y ago

First, the YouTube comparison is far less appropriate than you suggest. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act contains a safe harbor that is designed to shield internet service providers from liability associated with copyright infringment provided that they meet certain criteria. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit determined that YouTube was protected by this safe harbor. Second, and more importantly, you seem to neglect the fact that some AirBnB hosts are not just violating laws, but their leases and HOA rules. These are legally-binding contracts between private individuals. AirBnB's most ardent supporters like to focus on zoning and hospitality laws, suggesting that they're antiquated, anti-competitive, etc. Some of these arguments are quite reasonable in my opinion, but what about private contracts? I have yet to see convincing arguments around the issue of hosts who are violating their contracts with their landlords and/or homeowners associations. Most apartment leases have strict terms around subletting and many HOAs have restrictions around property use that would be in conflict with AirBnB-style short term rentals. Even if AirBnB doesn't have a legal obligation to help enforce these, given the number of listings that are ostensibly governed by leases and/or HOA rules, it seems implausible that AirBnB isn't aware that a good number of its hosts are breaking private contracts, potentially exposing those hosts, their neighbors and even their "guests" to a variety of risks. Does AirBnB not have a moral obligation to address this? I'd love to see more AirBnB supporters take on this issue. At least it would be more entertaining and perhaps even more enlightening than the recurrent arguments against zoning and hospitality laws.

nostromo 12y ago
Why is it Airbnb's job to police their listings for HOA and lease violations? Surely that responsibility is the host's.
- DanBC 12y ago
  How does US insurance work? Some people are not going to be covered by insurance during a sub-let. Those people might be the host or guest or apartment owner; but in the case of catastrophe someone is going to lose out. So there is some value to customers of having listings vetted by AirBnB so that everyone knows that the sub-let is legal and insured.
- doxcf434 12y ago
  Hardly Airbnb related either, here's a response I got back from a craiglist ad for a temporary sub-lease (that I declined): > My place is available for the whole month of June, and is located at xxxx. Subletting isn't technically allowed at the building, so you would need to be careful around the staff.
- 7Figures2Commas 12y ago
  I was expecting a response like this, and it completely misses the point of my comment. Notwithstanding the potential benefits to hosts and guests in ensuring that activity on AirBnB is above board, I focused on a simple question: even if AirBnB doesn't have a legal obligation to help enforce private contracts, does AirBnB not have a moral obligation to address the issue because it is almost certainly aware that a good number of its hosts are violating them? It seems like your response is "AirBnB has no moral obligation to try to discourage its hosts from violating an agreement it knows likely exists", but I'm curious as to why you chose to throw this back to me as a question rather than stating a concrete opinion. Do you hold other companies to this same standard, and are you comfortable stating on record that what's good for the goose is always good for the gander? If so, why disguise your opinion as a question? On the point of corporate morality, I'd note that companies in certain industries are frequently lambasted for acting amorally. Just look in finance. Big banks, mortgage lenders, hedge funds, high frequency traders. They face almost constant criticism for engaging in behavior or failing to prevent behavior, even when their actions do not violate the letter of the law. Are there no AirBnB supporters who have criticized other companies for amoral behavior?

tptacek 12y ago

I find Airbnb tremendously valuable as well (Airbnb is probably hooking me up in London early next week, after I finish spending this week in a Scottish house I also rented through an online service). And I'm sort of addicted to Uber as well. That doesn't make either of those services any less fraught. They can be incredibly valuable to me and a net negative for the communities they operate in. Not everything that makes me happy is good for society.

baddox 12y ago
> They can be incredibly valuable to me and a net negative for the communities they operate in. That is at least as true of government as it is of companies that bend or break regulations.
harimau 12y ago
Curious: why choose to pay instead of using a free service like couchsurfing.org?
- vvvv 12y ago
  I wouldn't call CS a "free service". It's supposed to be more of a community. It's great for meeting people and learning their way of life, but if I travel on business or when I know I won't have much time to spend with the host, I find alternative accommodation.
- tptacek 12y ago
  There's four of us traveling together. We're not looking for spare rooms. :)
- icebraining 12y ago
  Personally, I prefer paying (cash), because it changes the nature of the situation. As a free guest, you are - or can be - expected to participate in the hosts' events, such as meals, touring the city, etc. That may be great, and I might still want to do it, but I'd rather keep my options open in case I don't get along with them or I have different plans.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]