Here’s an analogy:  Most cities and towns require dogs but not cats to be licensed. There are  differences between the animals. Dogs on average are bigger, stronger, and  more aggressive than cats, are feared by more people, can give people serious  bites, and make a lot of noise outdoors, barking and howling. Feral cats  generally are innocuous, and many pet cats are confined indoors. Dog owners,  other than those who own cats as well, would like cats to have to be  licensed, but do not argue that the failure of government to require that the  "competing" animal be licensed deprives the dog owners of a  constitutionally protected property right, or alternatively that it subjects  them to unconstitutional discrimination. The plaintiffs in the present case  have no stronger argument for requiring that Uber and the other TNPs be  subjected to the same licensure scheme as the taxi owners. Just as some  people prefer cats to dogs, some people prefer Uber to Yellow Cab, Flash Cab,  Checker Cab, et al. They prefer one business model to another.

可以这样类比：大部分城镇要求养犬人办理犬证，但养猫却不用办理猫证。两种动物之间有所差异。通常而言，宠物犬体型更大、更强壮，比猫更有攻击性，因此会造成许多人的畏惧。此外，犬只可能咬人，在户外狂吠，发出噪声。野猫通常是无害的，许多宠物猫只待在室内。许多犬主，除了同时也在养猫的人以外，都希望养猫也要办证。不过他们不可能说，政府没有要求‘竞争性’宠物也需要办证，这剥夺了犬主受宪法保护的财产权，或导致他们受到了违宪的歧视。本案中的原告并没有提出更有力的理由，要求Uber和其他TNP遵守与出租车同样的牌照规定。正如许多人更喜欢猫，而不是狗一样，一些人也更喜欢Uber，而不是Yellow Cab、Flash Cab和Checker Cab等出租车服务。他们更喜欢另一种商业模式。

A license to  operate a coffee shop doesn’t authorize the licensee to enjoin a tea shop  from opening. When property consists of a license to operate in a market in a  particular way, it does not carry with it a right to be free from competition  in that market. A patent confers an exclusive right to make and sell the  patented product, but no right to prevent a competitor from inventing a  non-infringing substitute product that erodes the patentee’s profits. Indeed  when new technologies, or new business methods, appear, a common result is  the decline or even disappearance of the old. Were the old deemed to have a constitutional  right to preclude the entry of the new into the markets of the old, economic  progress might grind to a halt. Instead of taxis we might have horse and  buggies; instead of the telephone, the telegraph; instead of computers, slide  rules. Obsolescence would equal entitlement.

持有咖啡厅营业牌照并不意味着牌照持有人可以阻止一家茶馆开业。尽管这一牌照允许以特定方式在市场上展开经营，但持有牌照并不意味着有权在市场上排除竞争。专利权代表的是制造及销售专利产品的独家权利，而不是阻止竞争对手发明未侵权的替代产品，防止自己的利润受到损失。实际上，当新技术或新商业模式诞生时，通常的结果是老一代技术或商业模式的式微甚至消失。如果老一代技术或商业模式获得宪法赋予的权利，将新生事物排除在自己的市场之外，那么经济发展将可能停滞。我们可能就不会有出租车，而只有马车；不会有电话，而只有电报；不会有计算机，而只有计算尺。

类型

获客方式

服务内容

结算方式

出租车

车辆寻找、等候客人

车辆空驶、驻泊的时间和成本浪费

车辆当即

将客人送至目的地

现金为主

电子支付为辅

预约车

客人提前寻找车辆

提前预约确认、担保等增加交易成本

车辆定时、定点

将客人送至目的地

各种支付方式

网约车

客人、车辆实时匹配

信息获取、匹配成本降低，人、车空候成本降低

基本为电子支付