[carbonx]

I think the issues is a problem of transparency. I deliver for Postmates and I really think that most of the customers don't really understand that they might be ordering from a restaurant that isn't partnered with Postmates. The knock on effect is that often the menu isn't really correct, so the customer gets their order "wrong" and calls the restaurant to complain.

[aquadrop]

Then the law should be about making it clear status of the restaurant. Just forbidding everything seems like wide sweep action that can stifle a lot of other good/innovative business models. Not something government should do.

[alexander-litty]

It is far more unpredictable to litigate based on intent and public perception.

If an app displays a phone number but doesn’t say it belongs to the restaurant, is that making the current partnership clear or unclear? It’s a question left to precedent, which means there is a chance the legislation would not have teeth.

Instead of throwing restaurant owners into that mess, the new law we have today forbids a specific set of provable behaviors.

[WalterBright]

All the law has to say is that the delivery service must note next to their restaurant advertisement that they are not affiliated with or an agent of that restaurant.

This would be a simple provable thing.

[caf]

It seems like a form of passing-off, which has long been regarded as worthy of proscription.

[ghaff]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but companies (and individuals) pass off things all the time. Shipping is perhaps the most obvious example. If I'm an eBay seller and ship something to you, once I give you a tracking number, it's mostly between you and UPS. (Unless, e.g., an item was improperly packed and UPS won't honor a claim, etc.)

[michaelt]

"Passing off" in this context doesn't mean something being passed to another party, like a sportsball player making a pass.

Rather, it's a common law term for selling an item while misrepresenting its origin [1] - for example, if an ebay seller claims to sell real rolexes and sends out fake rolexes, they have 'passed off' the fakes as real. This can happen even in the absence of registered trademarks.

Of course, most of the historical examples are of copycat products - but the definitions used on Wikipedia sound like it might cover misrepresenting restaurant partnerships - particularly if the restaurant's reputation is besmirched by inept deliveries.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passing_off

[MisterBastahrd]

That isn't the case with these delivery services.

If ANYTHING is wrong with your order, they will refer you to the business that cooked the food unless you blow them up on the phone.

[tomnipotent]

> they will refer you to the business that cooked the food unless

This hasn't been my experience. Every time I've used Grubhub or Postmates and used their form to submit an issue with an order, the services have always either refunded me the issue or provided credit. I've never had to deal with the restaurant, unless I wanted something outside of money.

[MisterBastahrd]

It's been my experience multiple times or I wouldn't have mentioned it

[criddell]

If you have a complaint, they just refund you right away. I think they know customers could start issuing chargebacks through the credit card company and they wouldn’t have a way to defend themselves against that.

[MisterBastahrd]

Nope.

[ghaff]

Even if there's no real impersonation involved, the reality is that a lot of consumers, understandably, are going to sort of lump the food as delivered as something the restaurant has responsibility for. After all, none of us have a lot of patience for companies that take the attitude of "Not our problem. This other company was responsible for that. Take it up with them."

This is especially true here as, historically, restaurants were responsible for their own delivery. To most people, these services are just something that the restaurant contracted out for and is still basically on the hook for.

[tomnipotent]

> as something the restaurant has responsibility for

Exactly. It's not unreasonable for customers to make the assumption that a restaurant has entered into an explicit contract with a delivery service, the same way we hold them accountable for the ingredients they select. It's a very different mindset from something like postal delivery from FedEx or UPS, where we are more likely to treat each party as separate entities.