>Still not the company's fault for the individual's lack of responsibility.

No. If they know, or more importantly from a legal liability standpoint SHOULD have known, then it's on them.

We haven't seen the test case that will decide the legal liability/insurability of P2P driver services, but it's clear that Uber and others are operating in a somewhat legal grey area and are not bothered by it. Indeed, you could argue that they are forcing the issue of regulation and insurability with their business model.

But I'd stop short of saying that they have NO responsibility. It's clear that Uber is hoping to delay any reckoning on that question until after their dominance is a fait accompli.

Their business model is predicated on externalising many of the costs forced on taxi drivers. Claiming they have no responsibility for crafting and operating a business model that's designed to socalise costs is horseshit.

if the costs are 'forced' on taxi drivers, how do you know that they are not more than than the actual external costs?

And take it with a grain of salt, since it's internal PR, but:

http://blog.lyft.com/post/75739276230/introducing-the-p2p-ri...

> Still not the company's fault for the individual's lack of responsibility.

You could very easily argue that not requiring drivers to prove they've got commercial vehicle insurance is a lack of responsibility on Uber's part.