Can't Win 'Em All: Uber Gives Up Attempt To Do UberTaxi In NYC (For Now...)
from the more-regulatory-fighting dept
We've talked about how innovative ride hailing company, Uber, was pushing regulatory boundaries across the country, often showing how restrictive local regulators could be towards innovation. In many cases, Uber has been able to generate enough public support that local taxi and limo regulators ended up backing down. But you can't win 'em all. Uber has admitted that it's pulled the plug on UberTaxi in New York City.While Uber is most well known for its "black car" service, it's also been moving aggressively into the taxi world (which is why it's getting sued in Chicago). NYC's Taxi and Limo Commission (TLC) has fought against this move, since the law technically requires cabs to be hailed directly from the street -- and the TLC claimed that hailing from a phone violated that. Uber, however, claims that the TLC has admitted privately that the service is legal. Either way, the TLC threatened cabbies who used Uber, and that limited the number willing to take part, which probably made the service a lot less interesting for users. And, for now, the service has shut down.
The TLC, for its part, seems to suggest that this is only temporary, and it would like to bring such services back -- but it needs to conclude existing contracts:
"In recent months, as e-hail apps have emerged, TLC has undertaken serious diligence and is moving toward rule changes that will open the market to app developers and other innovators. Those changes cannot legally take place until our existing exclusive contracts expire in February. We are committed to making it as easy as possible to get a safe, legal ride in a New York City taxi, and are excited to see how emerging technology can improve that process. Our taxis have always been on the cutting edge of technological innovation, from GPS systems to credit card readers."Hopefully that's true, but the devil is in the details... we'll see what happens early next year.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: disruption, innovation, new york city, regulations, taxis, ubertaxi
Companies: uber
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Yet another Third World stance for the US
And apologies to all the Third World cities where this rudimentary option is already available...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet another Third World stance for the US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet another Third World stance for the US
Proof there isn't one perfect solution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet another Third World stance for the US
And that there are plenty of solutions that suck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet another Third World stance for the US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Yet another Third World stance for the US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Yet another Third World stance for the US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now threatening cabbies doesn't seem to be abusing its dominant market position in NYC, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
A competitive marketplace is just too much trouble and we need more laws to stifle such unamerican activities.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So why exactly would they need to change their model?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
...that are designed to prevent new competition from forming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NYC distinguishes between taxis that get hailed on the street and car services and limousine services that get called by phone. The problem is that Uber wants to do both at once.
The taxi industry has no issue with allowing taxis to get hired by phone. It's the car services and limousine services that are opposed to this threat to their livelyhood.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
However, their opposition to the home freezer only solidified.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]