back to article App maker defends selling S.F. parking spots as a free speech issue

The head of embattled app-maker MonkeyParking says the city of San Francisco is violating the US Constitution by ordering the company to shut down its parking application. Paolo Dobrowolny, CEO and cofounder of the company, said that the cease and desist order delivered by City Attorney Dennis Herrera misunderstands how the …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. busycoder99

    The city have their analogy wrong

    It would be more like a pimp giving you information on where to find a prostitue, and taking a cut for it. The app makers are in the right here, neither them, nor the users are in the business of selling parking spaces. They are merely providing a service which helps locate them.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: The city have their analogy wrong

      Then that service needs to be free. Otherwise, de facto they are selling access to the parking spots - by either payment for information to access, or the access itself, and either can be seen as being interchangeable with the other under the law - and both the DA and the court are absolutely correct in their interpretation.

      That is the point of the DA's statement of interpretation: you cannot hide behind the law by trying to create a loophole of equivalence yet claiming their is no monetary transaction. If you charge to access information on where to find free food, but the "free" food is only given out to those who paid for the information, the exchange is one and the same in the eyes of the law.

      If MonkeyParking has the exact same information that is completely and utterly free somewhere in the universe, then it is only charging for the communicative services to bring ease to the user.

      However, since MonkeyParkings information is ONLY available through their service - people 'selling' their spots only do so though the system, and do not do the same methods anywhere else - then de facto equivalence of transaction is valid and MonkeyParking is breaking the law. Either they deal with that fact or create an equivalent free system and only charge when you use their app/service for the same transaction.

      1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

        Re: The city have their analogy wrong

        But they are not selling "their" spots. They are selling the announcement that they will be leaving their spots soon.

        They sure are not selling access to the parking spots as that would imply they have the wherewithal to block the parking spot at will -- which they don't.

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge
          Stop

          Re: The city have their analogy wrong

          "that would imply they have the wherewithal to block the parking spot at will -- which they don't."

          But they do. For the system to work, you announce your space is going to be vacant, someone "buys the information" and you wait, blocking that space you're ready to leave, for that specific person to arrive.

          After all, if you leave "early" and the person who paid for the info doesn't get the spot, then the system falls down. Either the seller doesn't get paid because they left "early" or the buyer gets pissed off because they didn't get the space.

  2. Richard Boyce
    FAIL

    Taking the piss

    They seem to be contriving to artificially disassemble something illegal into parts that individually may be legal. I very much doubt that they're the first people to try to get away with something like that and I expect there to be plenty of legal precedent.

    Any lawyers about who can comment?

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

      Re: Taking the piss

      Yeah, well, how is that "illegal"? Starting from the what one wants to conclude iis not a good form of discourse.

      1. Tom 38

        Re: Taking the piss

        Yeah, well, how is that "legal"? Starting from the what one wants to conclude is not a good form of discourse.

  3. .stu

    It may not be illegal, but it's very sad that people are driven to try and profit from every possible situation, rather than just share and share alike. Do they have no soul?

    1. asdf
      Mushroom

      can't resist

      Thank the Baby Boomers for that (at least in the US if not Western Europe). The San Fran pop itself may be young but they are still part of the overall culture where the Boomers have successfully cultivated the notion that greed is a virtue.

      1. Charles Manning

        Re: can't resist

        Baby boomers have generally been givers.

        I would think the post baby boomer generations have been the takers - always expectiving stuff to be handed out for free, cultivating the notion that getting stuff should be free without worrying about cute notions like ownership, permission etc.

        1. asdf

          Re: can't resist

          >Baby boomers have generally been givers.

          Yep they gave themselves a prescription drug entitlement alright (and it was W Bush the GOP Boomer on that one). Let the great grand kids pay that one off along with 3 Medicare dollars Boomers will use for every 1 they paid in during their lifetime (pre and post Obamacare both). And lets not even start in on the war costs. Fact is whether adjusted for inflation, compared to GDP or by any other measure Baby Boomer presidents have borrowed far more money than any other generation. The only time it has ever been close was during the Civil War and World Wars and those were make or break not for fun and profit like those mostly since WW2.

          1. asdf

            Re: can't resist

            And yes I am aware Congress allocates money not the POTUS but most of them are Boomers as well. Just like most of the leaders responsible for the worst economic meltdown since the Great Depression were also Boomers.

        2. Tom 38

          Re: can't resist

          Baby boomers have generally been givers.

          Are you trying to be ironic or funny, or do you actually believe this?

    2. Deltics

      It's called a "market".

      1. sabroni Silver badge

        re: It's called a "market".

        They're called "public parking spaces".

  4. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
    Facepalm

    What's the problem now?

    A private exchange between citizens regarding an evidently sparse resource with no victim in sight.

    Verboten! I realize that government shills are unhappy that the money does not flow into THEIR coffers, but the only conclusion is.....

    Gas, please. Preferably Zyklon B.

    1. P. Lee

      Re: What's the problem now?

      Actually, there are victims. Those that are nearby when the space would have naturally opened up but now have to pay for it.

      Initially I wasn't, but now I'm with the city on this one. Since the parking space was provided free, you shouldn't be able to charge to pass it on when it doesn't have value for you anyway.

      It would be stupid for people to be hanging out in a mall waiting for higher bids on their spot, when they would normally have left and freed up the spot before then.

    2. dan1980

      Re: What's the problem now?

      @D.A.M.

      Sure there are victims, though the term is perhaps a bit strong. Let us say that there are people who are worse-off under this arrangement than they were before it existed.

      Now, I don't live in SF (nor even the US) but I am not so sheltered that I don't know what bad city parking is like.

      One potential fall-out from this is that parking spots will end up being occupied for their full allowed time. Perhaps that's not so bad on the surface but what availability there is is helped by the relatively constant coming and going. The less time any individual car stays in a parking spot, the more people can use it through the day.

      But think of the knock-on effect with retailers/cafes/restaurants/etc...

      The less people there are coming into the area and parking, the less business the local retailers will do. If you drive around for half an hour and can't find a park, you may well leave and that would be money not earned by the shop/cafe you were going to visit.

      After a few weekends of such frustration, you'll have plenty of people who just won't bother.

      Then, of course, you have the inconvenience for the drivers looking to park and not willing to pay. Again, 'victim' may be a strong word but those people will certainly be in a worse situation than they used to be.

      What is happening is simple: a public resource that was free is now being offered on a preferential basis to those willing/able to pay for it.

      If you genuinely don't see anything wrong with that then you're free to hold that view but I'd hope you also wouldn't mind if taxis started 'auctioning' trips to the highest bidder - say on a rainy night as the bars empty or at the airport . . .

      No 'victims' there either.

      1. Kristian Walsh Silver badge

        Re: What's the problem now?

        " I'd hope you also wouldn't mind if taxis started 'auctioning' trips to the highest bidder - say on a rainy night as the bars empty or at the airport . . ."

        Well, that's what happens with Uber. Because the service's pricing model is only based on demand and distance (in Uber's model the distance variable is constant for any given trip for A to B regardless of route taken), prices shoot up when demand increases.

        This encourages drivers to only operate in high-demand periods and high-demand areas, which causes low-period prices to creep up too because of low supply, assuming there's any service at all in these areas and periods.

        In one way, it's interesting to see how a "free" market would work in providing services; in another, it's dispiriting to see how badly a "free" market performs when it comes to providing a broad-based public service.

        1. dan1980

          Re: What's the problem now?

          @Kristian Walsh

          Demand-based pricing is one thing, but it is quite different from auctioning off a fare. Cab drivers the world over get caught for that.

          Valid points though.

    3. dan1980

      Re: What's the problem now?

      @D.A.M.

      What other 'information' can be sold like this?

      Perhaps in school yards, 7 year olds can sell information about when they will be off the swings. I don't know if you have a family, but what if you go to the local park and all the picnic benches are taken - not by families but by individual people, just sitting there reading with a mobile phone close by, waiting for someone to offer them $20 for their spot; $40 on a sunny day. That situation is no different as both resources are paid for by the public already through taxes and rates.

  5. DownUndaRob

    the meatspace alternative?

    So if I am approaching my car on foot and indicate to another driver who is visibly looking for a spot that I am about to vacate, am I then committing an offence? As I see it the APP is doing nothing more than allowing me to broadcast my intent a little wider and quieter.

    1. YetAnotherLocksmith Silver badge

      Re: the meatspace alternative?

      And how would he feel if you then suggested he pay you a quid, or you'd go and have another cup of coffee? Because that's pretty much what is going to happen with this App.

      1. Deltics

        Re: the meatspace alternative?

        The app does not empower anyone to withhold access to a space, it merely provides a service communicating the availability of the space to a wider audience than would otherwise be aware.

        If you leave your space and there is someone looking for a space but they are down the road/around the corner, you are not going to go looking for them so that you can give them the friendly nod to let them know you are leaving.

        If you see someone you can give that nod, directly.

        For people just out of eye sight but within earshot you could stand and shout at the top of your voice, to let more people know.

        The app just lets you shout even more loudly (and in a targeted fashion - i.e. to people interested in hearing your shout, without the residents of the street having to put up with your hollering).

      2. ratfox

        Re: the meatspace alternative?

        I'm not sure how the app works, but the "auction off" part seems to imply the original parking place user chooses in exchange of money who is allowed to use it after they're gone.

        I don't see any way this can be claimed to be an exchange of information. If somebody happens to be there waiting, they shpuld get the parking place. No one gets to say otherwise.

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

  6. John Tserkezis

    "It's like a prostitute saying she's not selling sex – she's only selling information about her willingness to have sex with you," a spokesman for Hererra's office told The Reg.

    That's rich coming from a politician. They have vast experience with trading in prostitutes don't they?

  7. skeptical i
    Thumb Down

    MonkeyParking creates two classes, those "in" and those "out".

    In theory, everyone is "in" on public parking -- first come, first served, luck and happenstance dictate when a space opens up in front of you. If I am trawling for a parking space, and one opens up in front of me, happy day, I wave to the departing driver in thanks, and life is good. If I am trawling and see someone in the front seat of a parked veehickle not move until a blue XYZ model with plate number 123 shows up out of nowhere so the XYZ-123 can park there even though I've clearly been waiting longer and visible to the driver of the parked car, how is that fair? I pay the taxes that make the public parking available as much as anyone else, yet the open-to-all crapshoot that is finding parking in any downtown now has the dice loaded for some and not others.

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: MonkeyParking creates two classes, those "in" and those "out".

      > 2014

      > Wanting classless egalitarianism on sparse resources and expecting it

      Soon in the UN: "Parking spaces - A human right!"

      1. dan1980

        Re: MonkeyParking creates two classes, those "in" and those "out".

        @D.A.M.

        Parking spaces are most definitely not a 'human right'.

        What you are missing or outright ignoring, however, is that free public parking spaces are, essentially, paid for by tax payers in the first place.

        That means that it is a civic right that the residents have already paid for.

        And anyway, whether the spaces are free or not is largely irrelevant. The important point is that, as a public resource, it should be available to everyone on equal terms. If it costs $5/hr then fine - it must cost $5/hr for everyone.

    2. Alan Brown Silver badge

      Re: MonkeyParking creates two classes, those "in" and those "out".

      "If I am trawling and see someone in the front seat of a parked veehickle not move until a blue XYZ model with plate number 123 shows up out of nowhere so the XYZ-123 can park there even though I've clearly been waiting longer and visible to the driver of the parked car, how is that fair?"

      In some parts of the USA this would result in the driver of XYZ-123 remaining in the park until the coroner showed up.

      I'm sure that SF city authorities are painfully aware of this possiblity

  8. Mitoo Bobsworth
    Stop

    MonkeyBusiness

    There is a word for this kind of 3rd party parasitic hucksterism - leeching. These freeloading bastards should be dipped in bronze & preserved as a warning to any snake oil salesmen who even dreams of trying something this obviously wrong.

    </rant> Apologies, but these guys really are taking the piss.

    1. Deltics

      Re: MonkeyBusiness

      Taking the piss is making you pay for the use of a parking space up front but not then refunding you for any time not used AND charging the next sucker that comes along to pay for the time you already paid for, if you left the spot ahead of your pre-paid departure time.

      That's the real scam in the "public parking" industry.

      1. sabroni Silver badge

        Re: That's the real scam in the "public parking" industry.

        There can be more than one scam. Classic "whataboutery".

        1. dan1980

          Re: That's the real scam in the "public parking" industry.

          @sabroni

          Points for introducing me to a new word: "whataboutery".

    2. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Holmes

      Re: MonkeyBusiness

      There seem to be some dots in your argumentation between the "rage" and the "leeching"? You need to explain this "leeching" further.

  9. Fluffy Bunny
    FAIL

    NEED MORE PARKING

    Of course the entire argument would be moot if San Fransisco provided enough parking for its people.

  10. Stratman

    Meh

    First World Problem

    1. dan1980

      Re: Meh

      So?

  11. Mole5000

    I didn't shoot the guy - I just moved my finger in the location of the gun trigger.

  12. Christopher E. Stith

    If it was about information, it shouldn't be one to one.

    Charge a monthly, weekly, or daily subscription to the service. Maybe have it ad-supported. Have all the open spaces shown to all the parking space seekers. That's how you sell the information without encouraging people to linger in a spot waiting for money.

    Some small cut or a discount on the subscription could go to people who inform the system about opening spots. This would encourage sharing the information, but each space seeker has multiple options and the person leaving the space doesn't need to wait for a particular person. This would mean there's as much incentive to list the space as open no matter what, although less than the current situation. However, the cost to the seeker would also be lower, so overall participation should remain high.

This topic is closed for new posts.