secondtimeuse

Counting the downvotes on comments, HN has sharply taken a socialist turn and lawyers are the new superheroes saving people from Evil startups. In other news Bernie Sanders hates Uber despite using it nearly 100% of time.[1]

The reality today is that there is a large lobby of litigators actively trying to keep any change in labour/Patent laws from happening. [1]

I own no shares of Uber Inc. and any other companies involved in these litigations. But the reality is that by framing this incorrectly as David (The attorney) vs Goliath (Uber et. al.) fight the article is just pushing your emotional buttons. At end of the day litigation is not going to magically create jobs out of thin air. Uber will eventually shift to autonomous cars or will go bankrupt or might end having chinese drive the cars via video conference. It's easy to blame Uber for the mess that is the employer provided insurance.

Its not the Uber which created that problem, its the legislative gridlock which is at fault. But its cooler these days to hate Uber for all that ills the hapless middle class in USA.

This is parasitic legal rent seeking at its worst, let's call a spade a spade.

Here is an WSJ article that calls for change in labor laws.[1]

>> You are clearly not familiar with how IRS functions. IRS can and often times does automatically freeze bank accounts if they suspect tax evasion.[1]

The reality is that when it comes to user data the analogy is even weaker, since most user data is transactional in nature. Hence both parties can assert their rights. This is particularly of importance in medical data. Where there are no laws that assure patients of his ownership of his own data.[2]

In reality when it comes to information/data the ownership argument is on a shaky legal grounds. And in some cases data ownership might be counterproductive.