Airbnb, Inc. v. City of San Francisco
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
2016 WL 6599821 (2016)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
Airbnb, Inc. and HomeAway, Inc. (Airbnb) (plaintiffs) operated internet websites through which users pay a fee to rent or list private properties for short- or long-term accommodations. Airbnb did not own, manage, or operate any of the rental properties, and the listing process was automated, with content being entirely driven by hosts without any verification or review process. The City of San Francisco (the city) (defendant) sought to regulate aspects of such accommodation rentals and had effectively banned transient or tourist rentals between 1981 and 2014. In 2015, the city lifted the total ban and enacted an ordinance, which provided an exception allowing permanent residents to host short-term rentals so long as the host registered the residence with the city before making it available as a short-term rental. Registration required proof of liability insurance, compliance with municipal codes, and other conditions. The city created the Office of Short-Term Residential Rental Administration and Enforcement (OSTR) to administer registrations. Airbnb filed suit and moved for a preliminary injunction, but the city requested a stay to allow for consideration of proposed amendments that could affect Airbnb’s obligations under the law. The city enacted a subsequent ordinance, Ordinance 178-16 (the ordinance), to encourage compliance with the registration requirement by making it a misdemeanor to collect a fee for providing booking services for the rental of an unregistered units. Airbnb argued that the ordinance was preempted by the Communications Decency Act (CDA) because Airbnb argued that the ordinance required them to actively monitor and police third-party listings to verify registration and that is the same as treating Airbnb as a publisher.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Donato, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.