Should technology start-ups operate under more lax legal regimes than other businesses? The answer should, of course, be no. Yet there exists a certain type of Silicon Valley outfit that seems destined to upset regulators as a result of the rapid pursuit of getting their technology out there.
This appears to include Uber Technologies – a firm in the vanguard of the sharing and gig economies. Its app-based, dynamically priced taxi-hailing and sharing service has seriously undercut entrenched cab firms the world over, leaving the likes of London’s black-cab drivers apoplectic at the lost business.
Uber’s swift taxi availability and cheaper rides have engendered an almost fanatical loyalty among hundreds of thousands of users in London and attracted a claimed 40,000 drivers.
Advertisement
On 22 September, however, safety regulator Transport for London (TfL) unexpectedly announced that it is Uber London’s private hire taxi operator’s licence.
“Not fit and proper”
Calling the company “not fit and proper” to hold a licence, TfL said its approach was deficient in four aspects: reporting crime committed by drivers; explaining how it certifies drivers as medically fit; explaining how it checks for driver criminal records; and explaining why it has that could prevent TfL or the police interrogating Uber’s systems.
Uber London disputes the decision and says it will appeal. But instead of immediately talking to TfL about what it could do to get its licence back, the firm’s first move was characteristically brash: it organised a protesting the potential hit to its service and the threat to . However, the next day Uber’s , committing the firm to change.
Uber is far from alone among tech’s big shots in having regulatory run ins. On 12 September, the US National Transportation Safety Board ruled that the electric car maker Tesla Motors fielded a driver assist system called Autopilot that allowed motorists “prolonged disengagement from the driving task”. This was of a fatal crash in 2016, the NTSB said.
As delivers us ever-more processing power we are almost certainly in for more of the same by tech-reliant firms that wish to quickly deploy cool, compelling technologies that puts them on a collision course with the bodies that govern them.
We could find out quite soon what the next example is. Facebook, whose early mantra was “move fast and break things”, is preparing to reveal to US Congress it unknowingly ran on its service – ads that may have influenced the 2016 presidential campaign for Donald Trump in key states.
