back to article It's all Uber! France ends its love affair with ride-sharing app

Ride-sharing app Uber announced on Friday that it was ditching its French service. Following a week of increasingly violent clashes with traditional taxi drivers, the San Francisco-based company announced that its popular Uberpop service would be suspended from 8pm tonight and would no longer appear on users’ app lists. “In …

  1. Lionel Baden
    Thumb Down

    Worried about their safety !!!!!

    So that's why they vet all their drivers & it has nothing to do with arrests being made ....

    oh wait !

    Can we get a "I Call bullshit on this" Icon please :)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

      Are you implying that traditional taxi companies as a general rule vet their drivers?

      1. Boothy

        Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

        Quote: "Are you implying that traditional taxi companies as a general rule vet their drivers?.

        No, not the taxi companies, but when the prospective driver applies for a license to become a taxi driver, they do get vetted at that point.

        If Uber required their drivers be licensed taxi drivers, then I suspect much of the issues they face, would go away.

        1. J.G.Harston Silver badge

          Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

          It's irrelevant whether Uber require their drivers to be licensed or not, THE LAW requires their drivers to be licenced.

          1. Blank Reg

            Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

            And the laws typically require that drivers and taxi companies be licensed, have the required insurance etc. And as far as I know fares are also regulated in most cities. How is it fair that taxis have to abide by all the rules, pay all the fees, be restricted in what they can charge yet uber can do as they please and charge what they want?

            If uber had to follow all the same rules then their business pretty much falls apart, if cabs were released from all the overhead and restrictions then again the uber business suffers. Basically uber can only succeed because of unfair advantages.

            1. big_D Silver badge

              Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

              In Germany it is the same, the local council sets the per kilometre and per minute (standing stationary in traffic, for example, or waiting while the passenger goes into a shop etc.). The taxi company have to display the official rates and they have to have a calibrated meter (it needs to be recalibrated on a regular basis) and taxi inspectors make spot inspections at taxi ranks etc. to ensure the vehicles are in good working order, the driver is licensed etc.

              I haven't heard of passengers being assaulted here in Germany, but drivers get attacked now and again.

              Uber have the similar problems in Germany. Their drivers are for the most part illegal and how they are driving is illegal: they have to have a professional driving license in order to drive a taxi (and Uber is classed as a taxi service), Uber doesn't ensure their drivers have the proper driving license AFAIK and without that, they cannot get insurance for their vehicle - if they are caught carrying passengers (or have an accident whilst carrying a paying passenger), then their insurance is null and void, which means a heavy fine and, in the event of an accident, carrying the liability for all repair costs and personal injury claims.

              That is why they are banned here, although it doesn't seem to stop them trying to do business. In their current form, there is no way I'd risk riding in an Uber and I just hope the drivers are never involved in an accident, because it will be a real struggle for the other parties to get restitution.

              1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

                Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

                Bingo. Same here in Edmonton. Local council sets "maximum" rates (to which all cab companies align) and those rates must be displayed. This comes in the form of a sticker on the window. Cabs are calibrated regularly, inspected regularly, and all the drivers must have a commercial license and insurance. I believe - but am not 100% sure - that criminal records checks are enforced for cabbies too.

                There is no medallion system here. Cab companies can field as many cabs as they want, but there is a limit to what's practicable. Anyone can start a cab company, but you'll be ruthlessly driven out of the market or bought by one of the big three if you try. (Though that was "the big two" 15 years ago...so entering the market is in fact possible.)

                All the Taxi companies here have apps. In fact, the biggest one, which has several sub-"brands", has one for each brand. (Not ideal, I know.) They're all made by the same developer. *sigh*

                Uber and Lyft are easier to use in that you can sit there and stare at your mobile and tap your feet and wait for the cab to arrive. But in every other way the local council-regulated taxies are better, sfare and more predictable.

      2. jonathanb Silver badge

        Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

        The local councils that give them their licences do vet them.

      3. camnai

        Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

        When I took a job as a taxi driver several decades ago, I was fingerprinted, photographed, and had to buy the taxi driver's license. And I also had to have what was called a 'chauffeur's' driver's license to begin with. The shared economy should come into play as a reaction to economic hardship. It should not be a cause of it. If you don't want to pay for a taxi, take the bus.

      4. Yag

        Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

        In France, you cannot become a taxi driver if you have any kind of criminal record.

    2. astrax

      Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

      Uber - as popular as a Greek Politician.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

        vetting is bullshit, just means the persons never been caught. Such as the

        However having all the drivers details provided to you in a rather permanent fashion (which I believe can also be sent to a third party) is far more worthwhile then vetting.

        Just take a look at black cab drivers, David Perry and Worboys were vetted.

        1. Martin Summers Silver badge

          Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

          Dear AC. What would you suggest instead then? Vetting is currently the best there is and better than nothing at all. Other than implanting someone with a chip there is no alternative unless you have the genius solution?

    3. MissingSecurity

      Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

      I'd say it''s less to do with the vetting of drivers and more to do with the licensed taxi drivers attacking Uber drivers, and no doubt the arrests played a part, but right now in my eyes France and there taxi mob look like they're in bed and slow f**king everyone that would cab in the ass. I guess I've had better experiences with Uber than with a cab driver, but I have a feeling, I'd just be a pitiful American, who doesn't know anything.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

        I think you find it's more to do with:

        a) only licensed people can be cabbies

        b) licenses are payable to the government for £XX,XXXX.XX

        existing cabbies hate the idea of unlicensed because it means tens of thousands in costs they were forced to spend are 'lost'

        government hates it because it loses a steady revenue stream

        In Spain cab licenses cost many thousands of euros and have to be renewed often, as a result it's not just Uber that causes anger, almost anybody picking up somebody from an airport that isn't a cab gets looked at very carefully and often angrily by the cabbies. If they suspect for just a second that it's not a FoF then things get very ugly very quickly.

        Seriously, I've seen people dragged out of cars.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

          "licenses are payable to the government for £XX,XXXX.XX"

          Not everyone uses a medallion system. In fact, globally, they're kind of rare. So no, in most jurisdictions it doesn't cost tens or hundreds of thousands to license a taxi. It costs you a commercial driver's license, commercial insurance and then you have to pay for inspections every X months at a licensed facility.

          But hey, keep assuming that every single jurisdiction and every single economic influencer is the same everywhere. You'll go far that way.

    4. DaveDaveDave

      Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

      Uber does vet all their drivers. Which is part of the reason why you're several orders of magnitude less likely to be assaulted (in any way) by an Uber driver than by a regular cabbie. The other major contributor to that is of course that a crim would have to be mad to assault someone when there's as clear an electronic trail as Uber leaves.

      1. 9Rune5

        Re: Worried about their safety !!!!!

        Yes, vetting is absolutely crucial!

        I would hate to e.g. run the risk of getting my hair cut by an unvetted hairdresser or have my lawn mowed by an unvetted gardner.

        Chaos would surely follow.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Whatever happened to Insignia anyway?

    Missed opportunity for a cheesy headline, should have read "It's all Uber Now".

    (Which as all us 80s kids know is an amusing reference to the famous Insigna advert. What? The *what* Stones....? Oh, I think I heard of them, they were Mick Jagger's old band before he left and got famous for that "Dancing in the Street" song with David Bowie, weren't they?)

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    News reports on Uber lead me to conclude...

    ...that the decision makers at Uber HQ are sleazy scum with little ethical instincts. That's just the impression I get; not sure why. Perhaps it's their behaviour.

    So, shut 'em down. Use the Uber app to beckon the Uber drivers, and have them drive the client / undercover agent to the impound yard. Seize the car, auction it off.

    Simplest thing on Earth to shut down. Two weeks. Done.

    Operation Squish Uber pays for itself by the auction of seized cars.

    1. DavCrav

      Re: News reports on Uber lead me to conclude...

      And the ethical stance of seizing people's own property because their employers are acting illegally doesn't concern you?

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The sad bit is

    Uber cars were a damm sight better than any Paris taxi I have had the misfortune to step into.

    Last time from CDG the driver from the cab rank had no idea where he was going, the cab had a smashed windscreen, no aircon, and I suspect the car had been to Venus and back several times.

    The uber car as with me in 2 minutes, cheaper for the same journey, air conditioned and he knew where he was going, even if using the Sat Nav.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The sad bit is

      Of course the Uber car would be cheaper, they didn't pay for a taxi license, and likely don't have proper insurance either.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The sad bit is

        Of course the Uber car would be cheaper, they didn't pay for a taxi license, and likely don't have proper insurance either.

        And that, in one line, is the real problem with Uber. Sure, the licensing process can sometimes degenerate into money milking, but the core idea of a taxi license is setting up some much needed frequent checking on drivers, their cars and their insurance, and Uber was simply seeking to make money off the black market of unlicensed facilities. They were warned, repeatedly, and did what apparently every US business appears to consider SOP: they ignored the law until it caught up with them.

        Well, I'm not feeling sorry for them.

        1. DN4

          Re: The sad bit is

          > the core idea of a taxi license is setting up some much needed frequent checking on drivers, their cars and their insurance

          And what if I just don't care? When I was hitchhiking, there was no checking on drivers, their cars and their insurance either. I took the risk and it was my business to do so.

          I am not defending Uber specifically, just saying the reasoning something must be regulated because it must be regulated because it must be regulated... is just nonsense.

          1. gnasher729 Silver badge

            Re: The sad bit is

            You say "I am not defending Uber specifically, just saying the reasoning something must be regulated because it must be regulated because it must be regulated... is just nonsense."

            Paris taxi drivers like beating up Uber drivers. Why should the police interfere? I am not defending the taxi drivers specifically, just saying that the police must protect Uber drivers from being beaten up because they must be protected... is just nonsense.

            Really. If you don't accept that Uber has to obey the same laws that everyone else must obey, how can you argue that they should get protection of the law the same as everyone else gets protection?

            1. CraPo

              Re: The sad bit is

              Two wrongs don't make a right. Three lefts however, probably means you are in a minicab following his satnav...

        2. JulieM Silver badge

          Re: The sad bit is

          Yep.

          It's a matter of degree. If Uber had a handful of users, it would be a simple lift-sharing app. The trouble is, it has grown. And when a lift-sharing service hits a certain critical mass in terms of size and level of sophistication, it spontaneously becomes a minicab service, and thus worthy of the effort of official regulation.

          No good would come of requiring everyone who gives a friend, family member, co-worker or even a stranger in distress to be licensed and insured as a taxi driver; but even less good would come of taking the Extreme Libertarian position and allowing anybody to tout for fares anywhere with no oversight nor right of redress for passengers besides a bigger gun than the driver.

          And if the courts decide that Uber are running a full-blown minicab service, then it is only fair for them to be subject to the same laws as anyone else running a minicab service.

        3. Handy Plough

          Re: The sad bit is

          "the core idea of a taxi license is setting up some much needed frequent checking on drivers..."

          That'd be fine if that is what actually happened. Parisian taxis are a ripoff and might as we'll be unregulated. They are run by a cartel that, using unions, strong arms government.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The sad bit is

      The sad bit is that Uber introduces competition into markets where there is none. This makes it a threat to certain coddled industries and their fat, lazy and stupid benefactors (not always the customer).

      One day people will see the light, perhaps even in France.

      1. gnasher729 Silver badge

        Re: The sad bit is

        Let's put it another way. Uber started with an idea and got investors coming up with an amount of money that gives Uber an estimated valuation of $50bn. Even with that money, they have no chance of competing with the established taxi companies if they follow the legal rules that everyone else has to follow.

        So the course of action is clear: Spend lots of money on lobbying to make it possible to go around legislation. Run the business without bothering observing any existing legislation, hoping to cause so much damage to law abiding companies that they go out of business. In China, they were caught with their pants down using their investors' money to pay so much money to the drivers that drivers invent fake customers, pay the driving fees out of their own pocket, and get so much money from Uber that they make a profit!

    3. astrax

      Re: The sad bit is

      "...and he knew where he was going, even if using the Sat Nav."

      Eh?!

  5. regadpellagru
    Coffee/keyboard

    Correction, here ...

    "However the service is in fact illegal in France and last week Pierre-Dimitri Gore-Coty, general manager for Western Europe and Thibaud Simphal, general manager of Uber France, were arrested. They will have their day in court in September."

    It's true that both blokes have been arrested, due to insane political pressure, that was deemed (source: Le Canard Enchaîné, 01/07/2015, page 2) as overkill by police insiders.

    However, it is not true the service is illegal in France. This is up in the air at courts.

    Taxis are actually angry because they buy their licence at 200 000 Euros which puts them much at debt, unlike Uber, due to, it seems, a legal loophole. Of course, Uber can have prices totally lower than taxis due to lacking this huge racket/tax, so we have unfair competition, here.

    1. gnasher729 Silver badge

      Re: Correction, here ...

      You are making a mistake here. If someone goes to court for burglary, then the person might be innocent, but we know that burglary is a crime. Same here; the two general managers who got arrested might be innocent although I don't know how, but the service they are running is illegal.

    2. Turtle

      @regadpellagru Re: Correction, here ...

      "However, it is not true the service is illegal in France. This is up in the air at courts."

      Although I am not very familiar with legal systems based on the Napoleonic Code, I'd think that this statement is probably wrong. Uber *is* illegal in France; the courts might eventually decide that it must be recognized as legal, but until they do so, it is, in fact, illegal. Laws are valid until actually annulled and the existence of a lawsuit seeking to annul the law does not invalidate the law and does not prevent its enforcement (unless the courts issue an injunction preventing enforcement).

    3. J.G.Harston Silver badge

      Re: Correction, here ...

      "Of course, Uber can have prices totally lower than taxis due to lacking this huge racket/tax, so we have unfair competition, here."

      ANY taxi can have their prices lower than the competition. Regulated taxi fares are a CEILING not a floor.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Correction, here ...

        ceiling price? tell that to the average London LTDA cabbie - free to charge whatever you want up to a maximum, not supposed to rip off tourists by taking silly routes?

      2. big_D Silver badge

        Re: Correction, here ...

        ANY taxi can have their prices lower than the competition. Regulated taxi fares are a CEILING not a floor.

        I don't know about where you live, but here in Germany, it is not a ceiling, it is the price and the taxi meter is calibrated by the local authority and sealed, so there is no fiddling with the price.

        If a driver is caught with a tampered meter, then they are in big trouble, will face a hefty fine and possibly lose their licence.

        1. J.G.Harston Silver badge

          Re: Correction, here ...

          Ok: In UK taxi law, the taxi licensing authority may chose to regulate taxi fares by setting a ceiling to fares. The taxi meter is calibrated by the local authority and sealed. Any taxi is perfectly free to charge anything up to that ceiling.

        2. gnasher729 Silver badge

          Re: Correction, here ...

          "If a driver is caught with a tampered meter, then they are in big trouble, will face a hefty fine and possibly lose their licence. "

          Which is all not a problem for Uber, because the driver doesn't have a meter that they could tamper with, and they don't have a license that they could lose.

          1. big_D Silver badge

            Re: Correction, here ...

            @gnasher729 which is a problem for Uber drivers, because they don't have a meter at all... Without a calibrated and sealed meter they cannot carry any passengers for profit.

            There is a loophole, you can carry a paying passenger from A to B, as long a 1) you were going from A to B yourself or that A and B are on that route and 2) that you do not charge any more than their share of the fuel used on the journey.

    4. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Correction, here ...

      "However, it is not true the service is illegal in France. This is up in the air at courts."

      It was found to be an illegal business practice in a court of law.

      Uber appealed to a higher court.

      It was again found to be an illegal business practice in a court of law.

      Uber are appealing AGAIN to a yet higher court.

      This smacks of "keep spending until we get the right answer".

    5. Handy Plough

      Re: Correction, here ...

      Quoting Le Canard is like quoting The Daily Star and cross referencing Viz.

      1. FrogsAndChips Silver badge

        Re: Correction, here ...

        You've obviously never read it past the front page headline puns.

        Le Canard may have a silly name, but they're one of France's most reputable newspapers. They have extremely well informed sources at the highest levels of politics and industry, have unveiled quite a number of big scandals over their 100 years of existence, and are hardly ever proven wrong.

  6. Tracer Hand
    Pirate

    If you're willing to ignore existing regulatory and tax structures you can have a successfully "disruptive" company too. Just ask Amazon!

  7. normanicus

    The French again deny it's people of what they want. They want to watch American films ad lib. State does not allow it. They want cheaper taxis. State does not allow it.

    1. J.G.Harston Silver badge

      They want unregulated, unlicensed, uninsured taxis. The state does not allow it.

      There, fixed that for you. Personally, I beleive that the state should not allow you that particular consumer choice.

      1. big_D Silver badge

        They want unregulated, unlicensed, uninsured taxis. The state does not allow it.

        There, fixed that for you. Personally, I beleive that the state should not allow you that particular consumer choice.

        Certainly as a road user, I don't want any uninsured vehicle in my vicinity. If they cause an accident, then I am left to sue them for the repair of my vehicle and personal injury, which means they will probably just file for personal bankruptcy...

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          "If they cause an accident, then I am left to sue them for the repair of my vehicle and personal injury, which means they will probably just file for personal bankruptcy..."

          You claim on your own insurance and they try to get it back from the other driver. Your loss is higher premiums, not the cost of a written off car and medical bills.

          1. big_D Silver badge

            Only if i have comprehensive insurance, if I have third party I can't claim on my insurance.

      2. Handy Plough

        If any of you think this is the will of Madame la Républic, you show that you don't understand France. Unions run France through bribery and corruption. Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité applies to everyone, but the unions are more égale than the rest of us.

  8. Bruce Ordway

    Taxi Licenses

    In my city taxi licenses are expensive and limited in total number granted.

    If I were a taxi driver I'd probably be upset with Uber and the governing body.

    1. Roo
      Windows

      Re: Taxi Licenses

      "In my city taxi licenses are expensive and limited in total number granted.

      If I were a taxi driver I'd probably be upset with Uber and the governing body."

      I get that, however they really should be venting their spleen at the authorities with the aim of working out to a more equitable solution for everyone involved.

  9. Roo
    Windows

    A Victory for the Terrorists

    Regardless of the pros & cons of Uber, it looks like terrorists have actually scored a victory with terrorism. -1 for the rule of law in France. :(

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: A Victory for the Terrorists

      "Regardless of the pros & cons of Uber, it looks like terrorists have actually scored a victory with terrorism. -1 for the rule of law in France. :("

      You're right about the rule of law in France but not for the reasons you think. Uber was ruled illegal in court and again on appeal. The "law" wasn't being enforced by the Police who should have been arresting Uber drivers continuing to work illegally.

      1. Roo
        Windows

        Re: A Victory for the Terrorists

        "The "law" wasn't being enforced by the Police who should have been arresting Uber drivers continuing to work illegally."

        Sure, and the taxi drivers were attacking people and destroying property with the aim of scaring them and destroying their livelihoods, which constitute criminal acts - even in France.

        I have some sympathy for Taxi drivers in the case of Uber, but I can't turn a blind eye to them smashing shit up and assaulting innocent bystanders just because they are annoyed. That kind of behavior isn't acceptable, excusable or lawful.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: A Victory for the Terrorists

          I agree, but how much taxi driver violence would have occurred if Uber had shut up shop when they were told to or the Police went out and arrested illegally operating taxis?

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    And showed the way for others to boot them out

    Don't want Uber in your city or country? Just follow the Paris roadmap and they'll leave...

  11. Michael Thibault

    Does Uber have something that...

    can't be duplicated by someone else? Isn't this all based on what is just a frikkin' app? So, encourage the conversion of the entire taxi industry into a f(r)ee-for-all affair, and let any and all play whatever role they want in the thing. If Uber is just a communications outfit, then they likely can't argue that they're entitled to a natural monopoly in that market--or litigate competition away. Eventually, ride-for-a-fee will settle down and there won't be any big winners. (At least Uber won't be a big winner, anyway.) Am I missing something?

    1. J.G.Harston Silver badge

      Re: Does Uber have something that...

      Perzactly! Uber is just another remote taxi booking service, the logical progression from waving your hand in the street, to messenger boy, to telegraph, to telephone, to email, to text message, to web site. It's nothing new, it's just another remote booking service. All the taxi firms in my UK city did email/web/mobile booking years ago.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @J.G.Harston

        Bit of a flaw in your argument. The taxi firms in your city may have done mobile booking a while back, but being able to book from one firm's taxis is VERY different from being able to book for all firm's taxis. I don't want to have to shuffle dozens of apps - that are different in every city. Where I live in an area with barely 100K people we have nearly a dozen taxi firms, I can't imagine how many a city like London or Paris must have, and I don't want to install a bunch of them when I visit London because my own city's taxi apps are specific to my city only.

        I do agree though that Uber is contributing nothing unique, all they've done is organized a bunch of taxi drivers who don't follow the rules for taxi drivers as far as fare regulation, insurance, etc. Now certainly the overregulation of taxi drivers to limit their number and drive up fares is something to be applauded, but Uber takes a much larger cut than can be sustained in the long run for basically providing an app that links driver and passenger. Once there's adequate competition on Uber's side, it'll be driven down to a small flat per ride fee. Uber's valuation is about 20x higher than can be sustained in the long run.

      2. Handy Plough

        Re: Does Uber have something that...

        Which city is that?

    2. JeffyPoooh
      Pint

      Re: Does Uber have something that...

      "...can't be duplicated by someone else?"

      A bit like BitCoin in that regard.

    3. KroSha

      Re: Does Uber have something that...

      Thing is, as is so often the case, the current incumbents have an awful lot of cash piled in the trough. Whether they are filling or gorging, there's a lot of money involved and no one like to think that someone isn't paying their wedge.

  12. Roger Mew

    Hmph, France breaks whatever laws it feels do not suit, for example I am prosecuting our Mairie for highway construction infractions from obscured signs to nice slippery illegal road paint and bumps in the road that will kill cyclists and motorcyclists. Here in France all the police and gendarme are out for is money, illegal speed limits, actions etc all figure in their actions.

    Many "greves" are illegal yet the police and or Gendarmerie actively support them, they cannot even be bothered to rectify vehicle light faults. Some 25% of vehicles have dangerous lighting faults yet nothing is done. So you think that the violent faction will be stopped, yes and public executions are held on Sundays!

  13. itzman
    Childcatcher

    Luddites?

    There's now an app for that

  14. JulieM Silver badge

    It is all a bit of a mess

    The whole situation is a mess. I suppose the minicab drivers must be grateful that the Hackney cab drivers are leaving them alone for awhile .....

    It seems to me that Uber is basically a form of organised hitch-hiking (for instance, when I was at university, not everyone had a car; and lifts were often exchanged by means of handwritten advertisements on notice boards in communal areas) that has edged closer and closer to becoming a minicab service (booked in advance via a central dispatch office; and even then, not from within walking distance of the actual vehicle, unless you are standing in the office making your booking face to face and it is parked outside). Because the difference between "Anyone going down the M5 next Saturday? Tel 3109" on a common-room notice board, and fully- or semi-automated dispatching with the aid of a mobile phone app, really is one of degree; and the point at which "offering a service to your fellow human beings" becomes "running a business" is simply the point where you are making enough money from if for it to become worthwhile for the Government to start extracting taxes.

    I do think it's fair that the requirements for Hackney cab drivers (who operate autonomously, and a satellite navigation unit is no substitute for real local knowledge; it doesn't know about roadworks and temporary traffic lights, or which local businesses turn out when and therefore which stretches of road and junctions are best avoided at which times of day) are much more stringent than those for minicab drivers (who are under the authority of a central office and can always ask the dispatcher for directions if necessary. Plus, the office know where the passenger is being picked up from, where they are supposed to be going and with whom in which car -- and nowadays will even text you the registration, if you call on a mobile; or can work out where you are from the caller ID, if you call from a payphone or are a repeat customer calling from your home or work number). (And as an aside, I hope they didn't pay too much for this kit; as it's all do-able with readily-available Open Source software and fairly-inexpensive hardware.)

    Uber is just a fancy minicab service, except using a mobile phone application and more centralised, better-automated dispatching. Their drivers are doing the same as any minicab driver, and so deserve to be subject to the same regulations. Without the expense of publicly-accessible offices in every town (one laptop in a broom cupboard hooked up to some virtualised hardware in the Cloud can cover the whole country) and two-way radio licences (they can just use the mobile data network to contact drivers on the move, even overlaying notifications over maps; drivers could even report temporary obstructions to dispatch, and have the news relayed automatically to other drivers in the area) Uber should still be able to turn a profit, even with the expense of proper driver and vehicle licensing and inspections. Granted, though, that's nowhere near as much profit as they could turn without such trifling inconveniences as having to play by the same rules as everyone else .....

    Still, I suppose making this sort of decision is the point of having courts in the first place.

    1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      Re: It is all a bit of a mess

      "It seems to me that Uber is basically a form of organised hitch-hiking "

      Hitchhiking is illegal in many parts of the province in my province and both neighboring ones. So that still rules out Uber.

      1. Intractable Potsherd

        Re: It is all a bit of a mess @ Trevor

        Trevor, that is one of the weirdest and most disturbing things you have ever posted! Why on earth would anyone make hitch-hiking illegal? And, based on what the OP was saying, would the organisation of a lift via a notice-board be covered - i.e. what are the limits on "hitch-hiking" in your jurisdiction?

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          Re: It is all a bit of a mess @ Trevor

          Hitchhiking is illegal because it presents a public danger. Too many idiots trying to hitch on crowded 110 kph motorways, city ring roads, or during rush hour in the middle of the city. It caused accidents which in turn caused a lot of loss of life.

          In Alberta we aren't as strict as our neighbours in British Columbia. But Alberta is (mostly) prairie and BC is (mostly) mountains. The highways are 100 kph in most parts of BC and if some dumb twat is pulled over on some bend where there's no shoulder (or on on of the tunnels) then the semi that's 500m behind him just might not be able to stop in time and very well might slam into him. Killing the idiot pulled over and his intended passenger.

          In Alberta we don't have as many blind spots, but we absolutely do have "near, at or beyond" capacity major highways. When I say highway understand that I am not talking about "oh, it's a jaunty 30 minutes from some bedroom community to London." I'm talking about "it's 4 hours from Edmonton to Calgary" or "it's 6 hours from Edmonton to Ft Mac." I know truckers and riggers (usually parents going home to see thier kids) that do the whole 13.5 hour haul from Ft Mac to Lethbridge in a day, stopping only in Edmonton and Calgary for gas and to take a piss. this isn't rare, this is our whole goddamned province.

          In Alberta, half the drivers are half asleep. They're driving along these great big long stretches of road at 120kph in the slow lane and 140kph in the fast lane on hiways that are 110kph limit. With the exception of "provincial NIMBY day" every three months (which is announced in the papers ahead of time) the cops don't pull anyone over for speeding, they flick on their lights and barrel down the hiway at 160kph to get to the next donut shop.

          If you pull over on the side of the road you are dead.

          If you go the speed limit (or lower) in the slow lane you'll be run off the road.

          If you go the speed limit (or lower) in the fast lane, you'll be run over.

          if you have a car problem on the highway, you drive it into the ditch and call the tow truck. We've got nearly 100% cell coverage so you just don't take the risk. The ditches are gentle slope and that's where non-functional cars belong.

          Saskatchewan is twice as bad again, because it's even farther between major settlements and it's longer and straighter and flatter.

          The cities aren't much better. A family of four might have 5 cars and an RV. One for each adult and teenager, plus a "hauler" (old pickup or candy van) and the RV. Everyone drives everywhere. Edmonton is a city of about a million people with a metro area the same size as London. the city proper - which is about half the size of Greater London, geographically - is functionally bumper-to-bumper traffic at 40kph for 6 hours a day, and not bumper-to-bumper at 70kph the rest of the day.

          You don't pull over on the side of the road without backing up traffic for kilometers, potentially getting a ticket and at least getting scalding hot coffee thrown at you by motorists pulling around you.

          Now, if you want to pull in to a gas station or something and pick up folk there, nobody is going to hassle you. If you find a roadside turnout or a rest stop (the provinces build rest stops so that people who are so exhausted they are willing to admit they're too tired to drive can park and sleep in their car about every 100km or so) then hey, go ahead and pick up hitchhikers.

          But the whole notion of "stick your thumb out on the side of the highway and catch a ride" really only applies on the lightly used rural highways or in the smaller, not crazy-busy-filled-with-angry-bees towns.

          Suggestions like "why doesn't everyone just drive slower" are going to be met with derision and laughter. Our provinces are huge, and they are sparsely populated. Our cities are spectacularly low density. There is no such thing as "living without a vehicle" here unless you happen to be willing to confine yourself to one of the "major" cities for almost your whole life. Even then, expect to take at least 1hr to get anywhere, probably 2 or 3, depending on if your journey is all bus or if you can shave some off but taking the LRT.

          People get impatient after 30 minutes. Try driving for 4, 6 or 13.5 hours where there is nothing to see. It's just farms and cows and farms and canola and farms and canola and some more cows. The mind wanders. You go loopy. Everyone drives faster than they should.

          BC is prettier, but after a while all mountains look alike and the need to get to civilization just so you can pee takes over. Maybe you're a good and courteous driver. Maybe him and her and them all are. But they won't all be. They won't all be awake, or not needing to pee, or paying attention, or courteous or whatever.

          So that's hitchhiking here. It's dangerous. Hell, driving period is dangerous. But we've designed our infrastructure and laws to mostly accept the realities of things rather than trying to force our massively diverse populations (a significant % of people in all three provinces weren't born in those provinces, etc) to come to heel.

          1. Intractable Potsherd

            Re: It is all a bit of a mess @ Trevor

            Thanks, Trevor - that comprehensively answers the question. It is good to see law in action - there is an observed problem, and the least restrictive solution is put into place.

          2. Roger Mew

            Re: It is all a bit of a mess @ Trevor

            So the truck driver is driving to fast for that which he can see. So that is driving dangerously. The normal trafic law states that you should drive at a speed within that at which you can stop within your vision. So going around a blind bend faster than the distance you can see to stop in is an acceptance of criminality. Dangerous driving in most country's is criminal, not just a traffic violation.

            The reason in Europe for stopping Hitchhiking was two fold, the obstruction to the road stopping following traffic being one, and also the safety of persons trying to get a lift from preditory people.

            Pedestrians are not allowed on freways, motorways, toll roads, express ways etc either.

    2. gnasher729 Silver badge

      Re: It is all a bit of a mess

      Uber is not at all like organized hitchhiking (or ridesharing, as they claim, fully knowing that it is wrong).

      With hitchhiking, I want to go from A and B anyway, and I pick you up to go all or some of the way with me, on a trip that I would have made anyway. With Uber, I have no intention at all to go from A and B, but I drive there because you pay me to do it.

      For example, in Germany they have been doing 20 years ago what Uber is claiming they do, mostly used for people wanting to travel longer distances.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like