News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by twic on Friday September 22, 2017 @04:32PM (#15315539)
If you're talking about a license in the sense of a right, like a copyright or patent license, or a license to drill for oil somewhere, then yes. But this is a license in the sense of regulatory approval of a specific organisation, which is not something it's proper to buy and sell. You can't buy someone's driving license, gun license, medical license, license, etc.
Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by ubernostrum on Friday September 22, 2017 @05:49PM (#15316160)
In the insurance field "acqui-license" deals, like "acqui-hire" in tech, are not impossible or even necessarily discouraged. Every US state has its own set of regulations for who can be issued a license to sell insurance, and usually it's easier from a bureaucracy perspective to maintain the license once you have it than it is to get a new one. So buying and selling of companies solely for their existing insurance licenses is a thing.
Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by stuaxo on Saturday September 23, 2017 @08:27AM (#15319442)
Sure, though The UK is another regulatory regime again.
Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by jaredklewis on Friday September 22, 2017 @11:40PM (#15317957)
Not sure the drivers license is a fair metaphor. That makes some sense: the government is saying this particular individual appears to be capable of driving. People change (thus the need for periodic renewals) but usually don’t change so dramatically that they can no longer drive.

But how does regulatory approval work with institutions? Institutions are ever changing, and like the ship of Theseus, eventually the original company will replace all of its employees, management, and even processes.

So what triggers a need for renewed regulatory approval? If the original company switches out 50% of its workforce it can keep its license, but if the owner changes suddenly the license is invalid. How does that make sense?

Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by vkou on Saturday September 23, 2017 @01:48PM (#15320834)
Typically, every year, or every X years, you undergo an audit, that verifies that your processes are still compliant.

Yes, the edge case of "Fire everyone and hire some other people" does not trigger re-licensing. Also, hardly anybody does this, in order to do anything other then downgrade employees to contractors, or union-bust. That's because 99% of the time, companies, even with a lot of turnover, don't change their business processes out of the blue.

99% of the time, when they are being acquired for their licenses, they do.

Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by eric_the_read on Friday September 22, 2017 @05:15PM (#15315875)
It's common in many parts of the US to buy a liquor license from an existing establishment.
Re:Uber London loses licence to operate by bsder on Friday September 22, 2017 @06:26PM (#15316455)
And generally there is a process that needs to be followed as well--public posting, public comment, etc. Any changes like operating hours, operating address, etc. means you have to go back to your council/commission.

Liquor licenses rarely just transfer unless you bought the whole business and didn't actually change a thing.