They shouldn't have to follow exactly the same rules as taxis; regulations usually distinguish between taxis (which can accept street hails) and call-a-ride services (which can't) -- though the two are usually confused because you often hear "let me call you a cab", which will summon a ride.

They reserve lighter regulations for call-a-ride since there's much better authentication (it's "look for Paul with this license plate" rather than "get in this random car"); a separate, audited, non-cash payment channel; and a third party monitoring it. The distinction long-predated apps.

Comparisons to reckless gypsy cabs are unwarranted.

Uber recently launched here in Northern Ireland, and here they basically do as our laws are stricter than the rest of the UK, or the rest of Ireland

Uber drivers here need to have a private hire license, and even display a Taxi sign

http://www.u.tv/News/2015/12/11/Uber-taxi-app-launches-in-Be...

"Rules, schmules."

Give time for the law to catch up. The wheels of justice turn slowly.

The rules generally prohibit a service like Uber from existing, so that doesn't make any sense.

Or do you mean all of the rules except getting permission from the taxi industry?

Uber are not a taxi company. Technology has changed the nature of the ball game. Suing Uber will not make any difference to that. In fact, it is not enough to sue Uber. They would also have to sue all the copycat platforms that mimic Uber and exploit the same opportunity. The taxi regulations, and the taxi companies living off these regulations, are toast. It would be like the newspapers suing television for eating their lunch. As soon as the technology exists, you cannot sue it out of existence. The genie will not go back into the bottle.