Page 21 of 26 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 259

Thread: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

  1. #201
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Of course it doesn't. He's been trying to sneak around what the law says on this matter through the entire thread. He actually tried to claim that laws against advertising the sale/use of public property pertained to people who physically place ads and not internet based advertisement. He's probably a shrill for the company and was expecting people on this forum to actually buy the bull**** claim that what is being transferred for information. If information was what was being transferred, there wouldn't be a need for payment after the parking spot has been taken over from the person who placed the advertisement for it in the first place.What is being paid for is access to spot, not the information for it.
    Exactly. To sum it up, if what was really being sold was information, then the app would fail. A person would sell the information that they are now leaving their parking space, and then they would leave. If the buyer doesn't get there in time, too bad. Good luck surviving with an app like that.

    The very act of holding the space and then leaving only once someone pays you makes this far more than simple information transfer.
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  2. #202
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Ahlevah View Post
    If you'd read the thread, then you'd know that the buyer doesn't pay until he gets possession of the spot. The seller is NOT guaranteeing that the buyer will actually receive it.
    If the seller isn't getting paid til the buyer is in the spot...

    How can you seriously claim that no one is selling access to the spot?

    If the only thing being sold was information on available spots, the seller would get paid at the time of the query, not when the spot was filled.


    If people are occupying parking spots, and only leaving when the person who will pay them money for the spot shows up....they're selling access to the spot.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  3. #203
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:05 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,413

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    If the seller isn't getting paid til the buyer is in the spot...

    How can you seriously claim that no one is selling access to the spot?

    If the only thing being sold was information on available spots, the seller would get paid at the time of the query, not when the spot was filled.

    If people are occupying parking spots, and only leaving when the person who will pay them money for the spot shows up....they're selling access to the spot.
    How can this not be blindingly obvious?
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  4. #204
    Assassin
    Verax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    9,511

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    I'm not robbing a bank I'm providing a security audit! You progressive Nazi's just don't understand capitalism.

  5. #205
    Sage

    Ahlevah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Flyoverland
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,912

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    a private lamp belongs to the person that owns it. therefore that person can buy and sell that lamp with no problem at all.
    Part of his argument is that the "Monkey" is selling property he doesn't own. My example illustrates the absurdity of this argument in that the person seeking the finder's fee is not selling a lamp as much as he is informing the buyer of its availability.

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    These spaces are not owned by the person in them they belong to the public at large.
    That's right. And, as I said, no one is selling anything other than knowledge that a parking spot is available.
    Нава́льный 2018

  6. #206
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Ahlevah View Post
    Part of his argument is that the "Monkey" is selling property he doesn't own. My example illustrates the absurdity of this argument in that the person seeking the finder's fee is not selling a lamp as much as he is informing the buyer of its availability.



    That's right. And, as I said, no one is selling anything other than knowledge that a parking spot is available.
    False. They are holding the parking space until the buyer arrives, meaning they are selling the service of holding a parking space and making it unavailable others. It is completely illogical if not dishonest to say that only information is being sold. Since they do not own the parking space, they by extension cannot sell access to the parking space. Doing so violates the rights of others to freely use the space without having to pay for it. If everyone started using the app, for example, eventually you would have to pay to ever find a parking space, favoring the rich, harming the poor, and completely violating the city's ownership of parking spaces and its intent to make them publicly accessible. Your argument is complete nonsense.
    Last edited by Lakryte; 07-06-14 at 10:44 PM.
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  7. #207
    Sage

    Ahlevah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Flyoverland
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:04 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,912

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakryte View Post
    By holding the parking spaces until another car comes, and then collecting money for holding those spaces, these people are in practice selling parking spaces. Call it selling information all you want, but that is simply attempted to put lipstick on a pig. End of story. What these people are doing is no more legal than random people deciding to park on my driveway.
    Parking in a public spot and parking in your driveway are not the same. When I park in a public spot, my claim on it is based solely on occupancy. Nothing else. If I want to sit in a public space and pick my fingernails all afternoon, thereby denying others of its availability, no one will raise a peep of protest over it because they have no knowledge of why I'm using it or when I plan to vacate it. In point of fact, it really isn't their business. Likewise, if neighbors in a city where off-street parking is unavailable cooperate and exchange spots by moving their cars periodically to avoid tickets no one raises a fuss about that because one member of the public can't subordinate another's right to occupy a space. It is strictly on a "first-come, first-served basis." In the case of cooperating neighbors, they are likely to be the ones who are first-served simply because they know their neighbors will be moving as well.
    Last edited by Ahlevah; 07-06-14 at 11:30 PM.
    Нава́льный 2018

  8. #208
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Jersey
    Last Seen
    11-15-16 @ 01:29 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    1,532

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Ahlevah View Post
    Parking in a public spot and parking in your driveway are not the same. When I park in a public spot, my claim on it is based solely on occupancy. Nothing else. If I want to sit in a public space and pick my fingernails all afternoon, thereby denying others of its availability, no one will raise a peep of protest over it because they have no knowledge of why I'm using it or when I plan to vacate it. In point of fact, it really isn't their business. Likewise, if neighbors in a city where off-street parking is often full cooperate and exchange spots by moving their cars periodically to avoid tickets no one raises a fuss about that because one member of the public can't subordinate another's right to occupy a space. It is strictly on a "first-come, first-served basis." In the case of cooperating neighbors, they are likely to be the ones who are first-served simply because they know their neighbors will be moving as well.
    +1

    This whole business is an infrigement, as someone posted early:

    The 1st Amendment isn't impeded in any way such as the 1st Amendment isn't impeded when one solicits Prosititution (sp?).

  9. #209
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    Quote Originally Posted by Ahlevah View Post
    Parking in a public spot and parking in your driveway are not the same. When I park in a public spot, my claim on it is based solely on occupancy. Nothing else. If I want to sit in a public space and pick my fingernails all afternoon, thereby denying others of its availability, no one will raise a peep of protest over it because they have no knowledge of why I'm using it or when I plan to vacate it. In point of fact, it really isn't their business. Likewise, if neighbors in a city where off-street parking is often full cooperate and exchange spots by moving their cars periodically to avoid tickets no one raises a fuss about that because one member of the public can't subordinate another's right to occupy a space. It is strictly on a "first-come, first-served basis." In the case of cooperating neighbors, they are likely to be the ones who are first-served simply because they know their neighbors will be moving as well.
    When the city says there is a 2 hour limit, and you are sitting there by your car 3 hours later, there is a problem. The comparison is about ownership. The city owns the streets, and by extension access to parking on them (parking spaces). Because the city is meant to represent the population as a whole, the policies of use of parking spaces are looser than policies set by owners of private driveways (which pretty much are for the owner's use only). That is the difference you pointed out, but it is not a relevant one to the analogy. The point is just as I own my driveway, the city owns public streets and thus the parking spaces it zones on them.

    Look at it this way. Say I wanted to open my driveway up as public parking with the same rules as a typical city. Then imagine people making my driveway unavailable to others by holding the spaces for the highest bidder, thus selling access to my driveway. As the owner of the driveway, I have every right to stop people from such a practice. It is my driveway, I own the ability to grant others access to it, and anyone who attempts to sell access without my permission is violating my property rights. They have no right to sell access to a driveway that they do not own.
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  10. #210
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:14 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    30,647

    Re: S.F. threatens parking app 'MonkeyParking' with lawsuit

    [QUOTE=Ahlevah;1063496738]Part of his argument is that the "Monkey" is selling property he doesn't own. My example illustrates the absurdity of this argument in that the person seeking the finder's fee is not selling a lamp as much as he is informing the buyer of its availability.



    That's right. And, as I said, no one is selling anything other than knowledge that a parking spot is available.[/QUOTE

    He is selling property he doesn't own. a finders fee is not the same as what is going on here.

    From investopedia.

    A commission paid to an intermediary or the facilitator of a transaction. The finder's fee is rewarded because the intermediary discovered the deal and brought it forth to interested parties. Depending on the circumstance, the finder's fee can be paid by either the transaction's buyer or seller.

    Also known as "referral income" or "referral fee".

    In a finders fee it doesn't matter if the person gets the lamp or not they will pay a fee to the person that found it regardless the outcome of the sale for finding the lamp.

    Yes but you also said that the person doesn't get paid unless they get that parking spot. which means they are not paying for knowledge otherwise they would have to pay upon knowing about the parking spot regardless if they get it or not.

    no they only get paid IF they get the parking spot. which means they are not paying for knowledge but the spot itself.

    the two are not the same.

Page 21 of 26 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •