Abstract
The following chapter introduces the overall subject of analysis. The first part offers basic information on what sort of an enterprise Uber and similar companies represent, placing such companies into the context of global competition. A special focus is placed on whether Uber’s business model represents a true disruption of traditional models of carriage of passengers’ services in general, or whether it represents a disruption in terms of a law violation. Similarly, the Introduction chapter examines to what extents the term “Uberification” represents positive appearances in the transportation market, and in what cases it connotes negative manifestations in commercial and consumer practices (such as monopoly aspirations, labor-related issues, forced arbitration issues, security issues, data protection issues, traffic, and public transport related issues, taxation issues and similar). Finally, a separate section is devoted to the issue of legal sanctions in general.
It should be noted that certain terms used through-out the monograph have the same meaning (i.e., Uber’s application/Uber’s digital platform/Uber’s digital service; transportation options/transportation services; Uber drivers/Uber partner drivers; Uber’s service/Uber service; and similar), whereas some terms are specifically meant as points of differentiation (i.e., public transport refers to transport in general; public transportation refers to both public and private transportation options; public-private or private transportation refer to the providers of taxi services and rent-a-car with driver services; and similar). In addition, some terms, although refereeing to a particular object, have a broader meaning (i.e., when referring to the term Uber’s business model, the same is, in general terms, applicable to all other companies (mentioned in the present chapter and other places) offering similar kinds of services and employing a similar business model). Finally, through-out monograph the term Uber service refers to the particular categories of Uber services designed to carry passengers by road. Uber, however, tends to offer a plethora of different services (i.e., “Uber”, “UberX”, “UberXL”, “UberPOP”, “UberBLACK”, “UberSELECT”, “UberSUV”, “UberLUX”, “UberBERLINE”, “UberVAN”, “UberEXEC” “UberFRESH”, “UberRUSH”, “UberEATS”, and others), some of which are designated to carry passengers, some goods, whereas others offer totally different kinds of services (such as renting electric bikes and scooters). It should, finally, be stressed that a particular service, for example UberX, offered in one jurisdiction, does not necessarily correspond to a service of the same name offered in another jurisdiction, having in mind that Uber tends to adapt, as much as possible, to particular conditions in particular jurisdictions, in order to (at least try to) fulfill certain goals.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
There are, however, opposing views on this matter, placing forward arguments with regard possible Uber’s privatization of public transportation options (Buchanan 2015).
- 2.
See, for example: the New York City Council, establishing minimum payments to for-hire vehicle drivers and authorizing the establishment of minimum rates of fare, Law no. 2018/150. 14 August 2018, approved by the New York City Taxi and Limousine Commission on 4 December 2018.
- 3.
Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles, No. S222732 (Cal. Sup. Ct. April 30, 2018).
- 4.
David Heller v. Uber Technologies Inc., Uber Canada, Inc., Uber B.V. and Rasier Operation B.V., 2019 ONCA 1, DATE: 20190102, DOCKET: C65073.
- 5.
See, for example: Spencer MEYER, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Travis KALANICK, and Uber Technologies, Inc., Defendants, 291 F.Supp.3d 526 (2018).
- 6.
Jolyon Toby Denis Maugham QC v Uber London Limited, High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, Claim No. HC-2017001496, 15 June 2017.
- 7.
Uber B.V v Commissioner of Taxation [2017] FCA 110.
- 8.
C-320/16, Uber France SAS, Nabil Bensalem, ECLI:EU:C:2018:221, p. 33.
- 9.
2016. évi LXXV. törvény az engedély nélkül, személygépkocsival végzett személyszállító szolgáltatáshoz kapcsolódó jogkövetkezményekről.
- 10.
Incidente de apelación de clausura preventiva art. 29 LPC en autos UBER SRL s/infr. 83 CC, Docket 4790-02-CC/2016, 5 May 2016; followed by the decision of first Instance Court on Contentious Administrative and Tax Matters No. 15 of the City of Buenos Aires, “Federal District’s Taxi Drivers Union et al. v. Government of the City of Buenos Aires”, Docket C3065-2016/0, decision dated April 13, 2016, directing the City of Buenos Aires to cease all Uber activities in its area.
References
Articles
Berger T, Chen C, Frey CB (2018) Drivers of disruption? Estimating the Uber effect. Eur Econ Rev
Bond AT (2015) An app for that: local governments and the rise of the sharing economy. Notre Dame Law Rev 90(2):3
Buchanan M (2015) The Uber endgame. The Awl portal. https://www.theawl.com/2015/08/the-uber-endgame/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Calo R, Rosenblat A (2017) The taking economy: Uber, information, and power. Columbia Law Rev 117
Horan H (2017) Will the growth of Uber increase economic welfare? Transp Law J 44:33
Leiren MD, Aarhaug J (2016) Taxis and crowd-taxis: sharing as a private activity and public concern. Internet Policy Rev 5(2):4
Paul SM (2017) Uber as for-profit hiring hall: a price-fixing paradox and its implications. Berkeley J Employ Labor Law 38:2
Pelzer P, Frenken K, Boon W (2018) Institutional entrepreneurship in the platform economy: how Uber tried (and failed) to change the Dutch taxi law. Environ Innov Soc Transit 2210-4224
Rogers B (2015) The social costs of Uber. Univ Chic Law Rev Dialog 82:85
Shokoohyar S (2018) Ride-sharing platforms from drivers’ perspective: evidence from Uber and Lyft drivers. Int J Data Netw Sci 2
Monographs and Studies
Anchustegui IH, Nowag J (2017) How the Uber & Lyft case provides an impetus to re-examine buyer power in the world of big data and algorithms. Lund University legal research paper series. Lund Comp Working Paper No. 01/2017
Azevedo F, Maciejewski M (2015) Social, economic and legal consequences of Uber and similar transportation network companies (TNCs). European Parliament, DG IPOL policy department B—structural and cohesion policies, PE 563.398
Deloitte Access Economics (2016) Economic effects of ridesharing in Australia: Uber. Deloitte Access Economics
Farrell D, Greig F, Hamoudi A (2018) The online platform economy in 2018: drivers, workers, sellers and lessors. JPMorgan Chase Institute
International Transport Forum (2016) Regulation of for-hire passenger transport: Portugal in international comparison. OECD/TIF
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (2014) Taxis and accessible services division. Status of taxi industry. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
Online Publications
Ahmed M, Johnson E, Kim B-C (2018) The impact of Uber and Lyft on taxi service quality: evidence from New York City. NET Institute Working Paper No. 18-16. SSRN portal. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3267082. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Bliss L (2019) Another study blames Uber and Lyft for public transit’s decline. CityLab portal. https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2019/01/uber-lyft-ride-hailing-impact-public-transit-ridership/581062/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Blystone D (2018) The story of Uber. Investopedia portal. https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/111015/story-uber.asp. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Bohorquez FA Jr, Felz JN (2014) #Ubergate makes plain that privacy cannot be a passing thought for start-ups. Data Privacy Monitor portal. https://www.dataprivacymonitor.com/information-security/ubergate-makes-plain-that-privacy-cannot-be-a-passing-thought-for-start-ups/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Brown J (2019) Uber prices are increasing in NYC thanks to new minimum wage law. Gizmodo portal. https://gizmodo.com/uber-prices-are-increasing-in-nyc-thanks-to-new-minimum-1832274587. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Bytes W (2019) Uber under the antitrust microscope: is there a ‘firm exemption’ to antitrust? Forbes portal. https://www.forbes.com/sites/washingtonbytes/2019/02/25/uber-under-the-antitrust-microscope-is-there-a-firm-exemption-to-antitrust/#56c6111d2a47. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Campbell AF (2018) New York City passes nation’s first minimum pay rate for Uber and Lyft drivers. Vox portal. https://www.vox.com/2018/12/5/18127208/new-york-uber-lyft-minimum-wage. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Chappell B (2018) Uber pays $148 million over yearlong cover-up of data breach. NPR portal. https://www.npr.org/2018/09/27/652119109/uber-pays-148-million-over-year-long-cover-up-of-data-breach?t=1551803559254. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Claburn T (2019) Until now, if Canadian Uber drivers wanted to battle the tech giant, they had to do it in the Netherlands—for real. The Register portal. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/01/04/uber_canada_contract_illegal/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Cooper R (2017) How Uber could become a nightmarish monopoly. The Week portal. https://theweek.com/articles/675434/how-uber-could-become-nightmarish-monopoly. Accessed 4 Mar 2019
Dickinson G (2018) How the world is going to war with Uber. The Telegraph portal. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/where-is-uber-banned/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Economist (2019) Lyft-off or crash-land? Economist portal. https://www.economist.com/business/2019/03/03/lyft-off-or-crash-land. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Edelman B (2017) Uber can’t be fixed—it’s time for regulators to shut it down. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2017/06/uber-cant-be-fixed-its-time-for-regulators-to-shut-it-down. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Edelstein S (2019) Lyft officially files for $100 M IPO, beating Uber in the race to go public. The Drive portal. http://www.thedrive.com/news/26710/lyft-officially-files-for-100m-ipo-beating-uber-in-the-race-to-go-public. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Field M (2019) Uber suspends its app in Barcelona after ‘yellow vest’ protests lead to law change. The Telegraph portal. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2019/01/31/uber-suspends-app-barcelona-yellow-vest-protests-lead-law-change/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Gabel D (2016) Are traditional taxi firms doomed? An answer from the capital market. SSRN portal. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2781319. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Good Law Project (2019) Uber case. https://goodlawproject.org/uber-case/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Griswold A (2019a) Uber stopped telling investors how much it pays to drivers. Quartz portal. https://qz.com/1556205/uber-stopped-telling-investors-how-much-it-pays-to-drivers/. Accessed 27 Feb 2019
Griswold A (2019b) Uber is boring now. QZ portal. https://qz.com/1513388/uber-is-boring-now/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Gustafson S (2019) Uber and Lyft are siphoning riders from public transit, study finds. AutoBlog portal. https://www.autoblog.com/2019/01/23/uber-lyft-public-transit-study/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Haitham A (2019) Egypt’s top administrative court lifts ban on Uber, Careem services. Reuters portal. https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-uber-egypt/egypts-top
Isaac M (2017) How Uber deceives the authorities worldwide. The New York Times portal. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/technology/uber-greyball-program-evade-authorities.html. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
JC (2019) A California court ruling could change everything for Uber and Lyft drivers. Ridester portal. https://www.ridester.com/uber-lyft-court-ruling/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Keszthelyi C (2016) Uber gives up fight, quits Hungary. Budapest Business Journal, 15–28 July 2016. Budapest Business Journal portal. https://bbj.hu/site/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Kokalitcheva K (2016) Taxi company sues Uber for alleged anti-competitive practices. Fortune portal. http://fortune.com/2016/11/02/flywheel-uber-lawsuit/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Korosec K (2019) Uber CEO: ride hailing will be eclipsed by scooters, bikes and even flying taxis. TechCrunch portal. https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/06/uber-ceo-ride-hailing-will-be-eclipsed-by-scooters-bikes-and-even-flying-taxis/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Lee JS (2019) French court follows UK in ruling against Uber in ‘employment’ contract case. The Telegraph portal. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/11/french-court-follows-uk-ruling-against-uber-employment-contract/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Lichten, Liss-Riordan PC (2019) Uber law suit. UberLawSuit portal. https://uberlawsuit.com/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Lomas N (2017) Uber to pull out of Denmark, blaming new taxi law. Techcrunch portal. https://techcrunch.com/2017/03/28/uber-to-pull-out-of-denmark-blaming-new-taxi-law/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Marshall A (2018) Ride-hailing is way bigger than Uber—and everyone wants a piece. Wired portal. https://www.wired.com/story/ride-hailing-business-uber-lyft-sony-bosch/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Marshall A (2019) The age of congestion pricing may finally be upon us. Wired portal. https://www.wired.com/story/age-of-congestion-pricing-nyc/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Marshall A, Thurm S (2019) Lyft’s IPO filing shows ridership is surging—so are losses. Wired portal. https://www.wired.com/story/lyft-ipo-filing-ridership-revenue-losses-costs-charts/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
McCarthy K (2019) Ahem! Uber, Lyft etc: California Supremes just shook your gig economy with contractor ruling. The Register portal. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/01/california_gig_economy/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Messamore W (2019) Did pre-IPO Uber ‘lose’ $1.8 billion in 2018, or aggressively invest in its 85% market share dominance? CCN portal. https://www.ccn.com/did-pre-ipo-uber-lose-1-8-billion-in-2018-or-aggressively-invest-in-its-85-market-share-dominance. Accessed 27 Feb 2019
Nair D (2019) Uber is in advanced talks to buy mideast rival Careem. Bloomberg portal. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-28/uber-is-said-to-be-in-advanced-talks-to-buy-mideast-rival-careem. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Nelson LJ (2019) L.A. County weighs a tax on Uber and Lyft to curb traffic congestion. Los Angeles Times portal. https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-uber-tax-los-angeles-20190226-story.html. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Ng J (2019) Uber drivers file suit against ride-sharing company over wages, OT. Boston Herald portal. https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/01/02/mass-uber-drivers-file-suit-against-ride-sharing-company-over-wages-ot/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Orton T (2018) 7 Places around the world where Uber is banned. Oyster portal. https://www.oyster.com/articles/64335-where-is-uber-banned-around-the-world/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Park E (2018) “Uber v. drivers”: the battle for employee classification. Washington University Law Review. https://wustllawreview.org/essays/uber-v-drivers-the-battle-for-employee-classification/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Reid J (2019) Uber planning expansion of new public transport feature. Business Traveler portal. https://www.businesstraveller.com/business-travel/2019/02/22/uber-planning-expansion-of-new-public-transport-feature/. Accessed 27 Feb 2019
Saval N (2019) Uber and the ongoing erasure of public life. The New Yorker portal. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/dept-of-design/uber-and-the-ongoing-erasure-of-public-life. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Schmitt A (2019) All the bad things about Uber and Lyft in one simple list. StreetsBlog USA portal. https://usa.streetsblog.org/2019/02/04/all-the-bad-things-about-uber-and-lyft-in-one-simple-list/. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Taylor K (2017) Uber is in hot water after a major cyberattack cover-up—here’s the long list of scandals the company has weathered so far. Business Insider portal. https://www.businessinsider.in/uber-is-in-hot-water-after-a-major-cyberattack-cover-up-heres-the-long-list-of-scandals-the-company-has-weathered-so-far/articleshow/61770326.cms. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Topham G (2019) Uber survives legal challenge brought by London cabbies. The Guardian portal. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/feb/26/uber-survives-legal-challenge-london-black-cab-drivers. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Uber (2013) Uber Policy White Paper 1.0. Ben Edelman portal. https://www.benedelman.org/uber/uber-policy-whitepaper.pdf. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Vincent J (2018) Google, Apple, and Uber must share mapping data with rivals, says UK data group. The Verge portal. https://www.theverge.com/2018/11/20/18104640/google-apple-uber-mapping-data-share-uk-open-data-institute. Accessed on 4 Mar 2019
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mudrić, M. (2020). Introduction. In: Marin, J., Petrović, S., Mudrić, M., Lisičar, H. (eds) Uber—Brave New Service or Unfair Competition. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, vol 76. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31535-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31535-1_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-31534-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-31535-1
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)