Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Other than the spirt of the law being drafted to explicitly target Uber/Lyft the letter explicitly clears them.


The law was drafted to formalize a set of legal criteria that was established and enforced by Californian courts. The spirit of the law was not to target Uber/Lyft. The letter of the law, according to the courts so far does not appear to clear Uber in anyway. We will see how the appeal goes.

Edit:

I don't see how you think the letter of the law clears Uber, Uber sea to fail every part of the test.

A) Uber does exert control over many aspects of how the work is performed, e.g. acceptable car models, acceptable ride acceptance rates.

B) The rides provided by drivers are central to Uber's business. Uber has no business model without its drivers.

C) Many drivers do drive for other companies and would pass this critiwia but some do completely different work and have not done any driving work independently from Uber. These drivers would not pass this criteria.


I think his argument is that the ABC test was crafted to ensure that Uber/Lyft failed the test, as it was only made effective January 1.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: