Uber vs. the world: How cities are dealing with ride-hailing technology

Uberis hereto stay and cities need toget on board,says a Canadian expert in e-commerce and the sharing economy.

"This company is so big and so pervasive, it's like theinternetof transportation," saysJohn-KurtPliniussen ofQueen's University's School of Business.

Even in the face of negative headlines about sexual assaults, concerns overdata privacy, protests from taxi drivers, raids on its officesandoutrightbans,the California-based ride-hailing company continues to grow. This week, Toronto city council asked staff to develop new rules to accommodate it within municipal taxi and limousine bylaws.

• Why cities need to regulate Uber: Valverde
• Why transport apps like Uber are shaking up how you get around
• Uber vs. Taxi: Why the taxi industry will never be the same
• How the sharing economy took off

Since it launched in 2009,Uberhas expanded its services dramatically. It's nowavailable in more than 300 cities in 58countries.The Wall Street Journal estimates Uber isworth about $50 billion, almost twice its value in 2014. In the Greater Toronto Areaalone, Uber says it has 500,000 riders a month and growing.

The reason, says Pliniussen, is simple:"People around the worldlove it."

With that in mind, he suggests, cities haveno choice but todeal with this technology that's giving traditional taxi companies a run for their money.

'We have to work with them'

Toronto decided it would regulate Uber in Canada's biggest city, though it hasn't yet worked the details yet.Mayor John Tory, to the chagrin of the local taxi lobby and its supporters on city council, has repeatedly said an outright ban wouldn't be practical.

"Most of the wise city councils are going to go the same way,"Pliniussensaid. "They're going to say, 'Yeah, we have to work with them, so let's just figure out what we want Uber to look like and let's get going.' "

There's plenty of precedent to follow.Uber estimates that more than 50 jurisdictions have adopted permanentregulatory frameworks for ride-hailing technology a fact spokeswoman Susie Heath says the company welcomes.

"We believe that ride-sharing and Uber should be regulated and we have been working together with provincial and municipal governments across the country to make this a reality," Health told CBC News.

California led the pack when it adopted ride-sharing regulations in 2013,coining the termTransportation Network Company, or TNC, todescribe companiesthat provides transportation services but don't technicallyown cars or employ drivers.

Other U.S. states and cities Seattle, Chicago,Colorado, Illinois, New York City andWashington, D.C., to name a few have since followed suit, adopting their own TNC legislation.

Some places havemore stringent rules than others, says Pliniussen, but they all generally follow the same basic principles they imposelicensing requirements, insurance policies,vehicle inspections and driver background checks on private transportation companies like Uber.

In Canada, Edmonton is on its way to being the first major Canadian city to regulate ride-sharing.The city is set to vote on a set ofproposed regulations, which would see Uber drivers get official city taxi licenses, in November.

Kitchener-Waterloo, meanwhile,became the first in Ontarioto propose a ride-hailingbylaw in August. Under the proposed rules,drivers would be required to have a GPS and a closed-circuit television system installed in their vehicles, and commercial auto insurance policies for a minimumof $2million.

Still, no region has been ablestrikea balance that leaves all parties satisfied, says Pliniussen.

In California, Uber employees are suing the company over payment, arguing they've been wrongly classified as contractors. In Chicago, taxi drivers are suing the city over what they sayareunfair regulations that benefit Uberover traditional cabs.

"These are the early days of the frontier of private transportation providers,"Pliniussen said. "That's why there are all these news items."

'Uber is forbidden'

Other cities have been much less accommodating.

London, England, on Wednesday proposed a set of rules that,if enforced, would dramatically alter how companies likeUberoperate, forcing cars towait five minutes before picking up a customer, banningappsfrom displayingavailable vehicles on a map and forcing customers to pay fares upfront.

This week, Rio de Janeiro, became the first Brazilian city to impose anoutright ban on Uber and similar technologies. Drivers who ignore the ban can be slapped with fines of nearly $500.

"Uber is forbidden," Mayor Eduardo Paes said after signing the the ban, which Uber has called "unconstitutional,"into law.

Uber has been banned entirely inItaly, Spain and a number of other areas.It was kicked out of Vancouver after a six-month stint in 2012.Ottawa considers the service illegal. So does Montreal.

In France, authorities raided Uber's Parisian offices in March andarrestedtwo of its executives in June.

The pair,Thibaud Simphal and Pierre-Dimitri Gore-Coty, face up to five years in prison and fines of 300,000 euros ($444,977Cdn)per charge over allegations of fraudulent commercial activity, operating an illegal taxi service, and maintaining illegal databases containing personal information of both drivers and passengers.

Amsterdam has applied similar tactics. Police thereraided Uber's office for the third time last week, according to Bloomberg News.

'People won't stand for it'

Still,Uber continues to fight charges against it and operates in mostcities where it's been deemed unwelcome, including Paris, Amsterdam,Ottawa and Montreal.

Even cities initially cold to thecompany's advances are now eyeing regulations.Vancouveris reviewing the impact of ride-hailing technologies.Ottawa has launched a review of its taxi bylaws.Brazil's biggest city, Sao Paulo,recently passed legislation banning Uber, but Mayor Fernando Haddad has yet to sign or veto the bill, tellingGlobo network he wanted to find "a middle path" to address the issue.

Pliniussensaid cities trying to keep Uber out know theyarefighting a losing battle. He compared it to trying to stop people fromusingsmartphones or ATMs.

"It's impossible," he said. "They're wasting their time. Peoplewon't stand for it."