4 ms·
> but Uber claims that because it’s a technology company, not a transportation service, it doesn’t fall under the ADA’s jurisdiction. What the ? Come on ,They
by aikah 11y ago
> but Uber claims that because it’s a technology company, not a transportation service, it doesn’t fall under the ADA’s jurisdiction.
What the ? Come on ,They don't get to decide what law they should follow. Or maybe they know that all these lawsuits cost them less than having to respect the law, I don't know. All I can say is that Uber displays an unbelievable level of arrogance.
- sigzero 11y agoMaybe. That doesn't mean they aren't right though.
- hnnewguy 11y agoI found that odd as well. What exactly is a "technology company"?
- fredkbloggs 11y agoApparently it's any company that (a) wants people to think it's hip and cool, and (b) doesn't want to play by the same rules as its competitors. Get out of the way; we're INNOVATING here! This kind of thing isn't going to fly in court. Judges have a long history of following the duck principle: if it looks like a taxi company and acts like a taxi company, it's probably a taxi company. Like any observant human, the judge is going to conclude that Uber is a taxi company and will require that it follow the same laws as other taxi companies. This will be the simplest case on the judge's docket this year.
- corin_ 11y agoWhat about a website like Just Eat in the UK, which offers an online ordering interface to thousands of independently run takeaways in the UK, are they are technology company or a food company?
- fredkbloggs 11y agoNeither. I'd probably call that business services or retailer/reseller. There's also the salient difference that those takeaways are not being paid as contractors by Just Eat (if anything it's probably the other way around). If they were, Just Eat would be a takeaway. If Just Eat made a piece of software for sale that other companies could use to provide takeaway resale services, it would be a technology company.
- CHY872 11y agoThey're primarily a tech firm. Particular distinctions from Uber are: You know which restaurant you're ordering from, you sometimes pick it up from the restaurant itself. They never try to make it sound like they're the service; they're saying that they connect customers and businesses. The businesses stand up on their own; they're just brokering the deal. The difference is that with UberX, Uber is the service from end to end; they perform every single role of the taxi firm; they tell the drivers where to go, they pay the drivers, etc.
- jacquesm 11y ago> Come on ,They don't get to decide what law they should follow. That's been Uber's stance from day 1.
- malka 11y agoUber may not fall under ADA. Its drivers are. Sue the individual drivers.
- tormeh 11y agoProblem: That's a whack-a-mole. Same reason the "right to be forgotten" is for search engines rather than websites.
- zo1 11y agoThey make an app that allows people to charge for driving services. I wouldn't call that as Uber providing a transportation service, personally. Remember, just because it "seems obvious" that they are "somehow" a company related to "transportation", doesn't make them a "transportation service" by whatever definition is used by the government for transportation service company regulations (or whatever that law is called). As much as I think individuals should follow the intention of laws, rather than the 'letter'. We have to be realistic. Either we petition to have the 'letter' of the law changed to encompass what we 'think' the definition should be, or we accept that the definition is a reasonable demarcation of what constitutes and doesn't constitute a transportation company. And lets not mix emotions into it in some sort of fit of outrage that 'they dare not' pretend like they're not a 'transportation company' when we think it's obvious. #Edit. Typo.
- forgottenpass 11y agoThey make an app that allows people to charge for driving services. No, Swipe is an app that allows people to charge for driving services. Uber is how the car is ordered, ride metered and payment processed. Oh, and the people driving are Uber's 1099s. I don't have the background to say anything about whether the court will hold Uber liable in this suit. But on the question of classifying Uber, I find it incredibly unlikely the court will be receptive to the idea they're functionally equivalent to swipe.
- shit_parade2 11y agoThat's how banks do it, laws and regulations are just another business expense.