Post by High Priestess on Oct 7, 2016 2:51:14 GMT
In the lawsuit where AIrbnb has sued the City of San Francisco over its attempt to hold Airbnb responsible for illegal listings on its site, the Judge hearing the matter has had challenges for both sides. lambada, nancesf, keith you may be interested in this.
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/10/judge-pushes-back-on-airbnbs-attempt-to-stop-san-franciscos-new-rental-law/
But the judge had challenging words for the city as well,
Other news stories on this:
www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/Airbnb-Heads-to-Federal-Court-Over-Lawsuit-Against-San-Francisco-396103051.html
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-06/airbnb-s-san-francisco-showdown-may-set-rules-for-gig-economy
www.businessinsider.com/r-judge-questions-airbnb-stance-on-san-francisco-rental-law-2016-10?r=UK&IR=T
www.arkansasonline.com/news/2016/oct/10/airbnb-going-on-offensive-in-court-2016/?f=business
IMHO I think the video in the NBC news story is biased towards the city. The journalist spends more time with and gives more support to the City's representative, Supervisor David Campos. One of the more offensive and ridiculous assertions by Campos, is his view that the city's ability to continue to have a middle class depends entirely on their being able to enforce their short term rental laws. It's as if the life or death of SF's middle class hangs in the balance of the 2000 or so "illegal" listings in SF. It's also a rather ironic view, given that from our perspective as hosts, being able to do short term rentals free from onerous interference from local governments, is what helps many stay in their homes.
arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/10/judge-pushes-back-on-airbnbs-attempt-to-stop-san-franciscos-new-rental-law/
A federal judge....appeared greatly skeptical that Airbnb and other short-term rental websites should be able to halt a new local law imposed by the city and county of San Francisco that would require the company to verify listings with the city before allowing them to be registered. "How does facilitating the rental of an unregistered short-term unit constitute a lawful transaction?" US District Judge James Donato asked of Jonathan Blavin, an attorney representing Airbnb.
But the judge had challenging words for the city as well,
The judge also chastised San Francisco for not providing an easy means for platforms such as Airbnb to perform these checks before beginning to enforce the law next month. "What's the city's vision for making sure this doesn't turn into an exercise in bureaucratic futility?" Judge Donato said. Sara Eisenberg, a deputy city attorney, suggested a system like how Uber requires drivers to simply send a scan of their driver’s license one time.
Later, Donato continued his warning to the city when speaking to James Emery, another deputy city attorney for San Francisco.
"If the host lies to Airbnb and comes up with a facsimile, Airbnb is on the hook, right?" he said. "It seems to me the only way this works is if the city provides some up or down binary. For strict criminal liability—you have to make it work for them if they're on the hook on the back end. My point is you are Fort Knox. You hold all the information about whether something is legal or not—you gotta open up the vault. How are you going to do that? He -- meaning Emery-- said ‘I'm happy to help’—that's not a plan when you're going to prosecute somebody."
"We're going to develop an enforcement plan, and it's going to work," Emery replied.
"That's not good enough," the judge fired back. "You understand that, right?"
Emery responded that if a host was putting up a fake counterfeit number to pacify the concerns of Airbnb, "I think it’s speculative and far-fetched that the city would put the hammer down."
But Judge Donato wasn’t convinced. "There's no guarantee that the city won’t."
Later, Donato continued his warning to the city when speaking to James Emery, another deputy city attorney for San Francisco.
"If the host lies to Airbnb and comes up with a facsimile, Airbnb is on the hook, right?" he said. "It seems to me the only way this works is if the city provides some up or down binary. For strict criminal liability—you have to make it work for them if they're on the hook on the back end. My point is you are Fort Knox. You hold all the information about whether something is legal or not—you gotta open up the vault. How are you going to do that? He -- meaning Emery-- said ‘I'm happy to help’—that's not a plan when you're going to prosecute somebody."
"We're going to develop an enforcement plan, and it's going to work," Emery replied.
"That's not good enough," the judge fired back. "You understand that, right?"
Emery responded that if a host was putting up a fake counterfeit number to pacify the concerns of Airbnb, "I think it’s speculative and far-fetched that the city would put the hammer down."
But Judge Donato wasn’t convinced. "There's no guarantee that the city won’t."
Other news stories on this:
www.nbcbayarea.com/investigations/Airbnb-Heads-to-Federal-Court-Over-Lawsuit-Against-San-Francisco-396103051.html
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-06/airbnb-s-san-francisco-showdown-may-set-rules-for-gig-economy
www.businessinsider.com/r-judge-questions-airbnb-stance-on-san-francisco-rental-law-2016-10?r=UK&IR=T
www.arkansasonline.com/news/2016/oct/10/airbnb-going-on-offensive-in-court-2016/?f=business
IMHO I think the video in the NBC news story is biased towards the city. The journalist spends more time with and gives more support to the City's representative, Supervisor David Campos. One of the more offensive and ridiculous assertions by Campos, is his view that the city's ability to continue to have a middle class depends entirely on their being able to enforce their short term rental laws. It's as if the life or death of SF's middle class hangs in the balance of the 2000 or so "illegal" listings in SF. It's also a rather ironic view, given that from our perspective as hosts, being able to do short term rentals free from onerous interference from local governments, is what helps many stay in their homes.