Hacker News Reader

Comment by gtirloni | Hacker News Reader

Airbnb doesn't have to know about laws in every places, but if it knows about such laws (and that they're being actively enforced) in SF and NYC, why allow people to announce or rent places there in the first place?

There are plenty of services (online streaming) that will tell you "sorry, our service is not available in your country/city/etc".

The fact Airbnb is allowing this to continue makes me question their ethics. It's all good they want to change the law but while they haven't had success in the area, is it worth the bad press and headaches for renters?

View on HN

I have lived in 6 different jurisdictions in three countries. None of them allowed short term rentals (<30 days) without appropriate zoning, license, et cetera. This is not about differing laws in differing locales. This is about ignoring widely applicable law . . . granted law that is widely ignored with little consequence. AirBnB would not have a business if they made a good faith effort to comply with the law.

This is about ignoring widely applicable law

It seems that technology and culture have moved faster than law (shocking, I know) and that laws that might have been a good idea in one set of circumstances aren't anymore.

Or the laws are still good ideas, but startups "move fast and break things" as an excuse to circumvent the laws for their own growth and profit. I'm sure companies ignoring the law to increase profits is also incredibly shocking.

Alternatively, it could be that the law is more relevant than ever. The web (and airbnb in particular) has made it far more practical to turn the single family next door to mine into a hotel.

Does this mean that the law that says you can't do this is obsolete, or more relevant than it has ever been?

In the past, I was unlikely to suddenly discover that I live next to a hotel, because it was impractical. Now that it can be accomplished by going to a website, entering an address, and hitting the "create hotel" button, I need that legal protection.

Their business model is illegal almost everywhere people would want to stay. It's not an ethical company. They're betting on their disruptive quality to overcome the ethics.

> The fact Airbnb is allowing this to continue makes me question their ethics.

Don't ascribe ethics to a company. Companies are not people. Companies don't care about ethics. They care about legal responsibility.

Companies are made of people. (Some) people care about ethics. (Somes) companies care about ethics.

For a company that is based on trust (https://www.airbnb.com/trust) I expect more from them than the lowly behavior we're used to see from other well known corporations that don't care.

why allow people to announce or rent places there in the first place?

Because they get a cut?

That's true. So perhaps that cut is high enough to make the rest worth it. I'm taking Airbnb out of my hip&cool list of companies :)

> The fact Airbnb is allowing this to continue makes me question their ethics.

Laws and ethics are not the same thing. In fact, it is often ethical to break a law.

That's obvious and well known. Perhaps I should have phrased it as "their ethics towards their customers". Better now? I'm not discussing any of the laws involved.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com