Oh that's relevant. I don't understand why Netflix has to deal with Warner & co. to buy rights for streaming, while Uber is above the law. All this just because it's "the new".
It's easy to become rich and powerful when you play with different rules.
Because I think this is how this world works. There are laws, and some of them are old, yet, they are there for a reason.
All companies have to adapt, you (the company owner) find the way out and then complain a country is "behind".
You see this as a stress test, and while I agree with you because as I wrote above things could have been done differently, it's also true that there are many companies innovating without breaking laws (see the iphone, etc), meaning that you don't necessarily have to break the law to do something good. There are other more peaceful ways to propose your ideas, but the reality is that they wouldn't bring innovation "right now, the way I want it". At least, that's my opinion. Sometimes things take time. We are talking about a whole category of people that you want to replace just because you think they are out of date.
Do you really think Netflix wants to pay warner? Do you think that they want to set geographical limitations?
Sure, I agree with all that. And if the authorities believe that the laws shouldn't be changed right now, then can and should punish companies for it - like Italy is doing.
But the test, the confrontation itself is still valuable, and I think Uber is ethically entitled to try.
It's easy to become rich and powerful when you play with different rules.