The New York State legislature passed a bill last week that would make advertising entire-home rentals for fewer than 30 days illegal. The bill would affect many of the city’s residents who rent out their apartments on Airbnb while they are away. Now it is up to Governor Andrew Cuomo to sign or veto the bill.

The new bill would mean that anyone who attempts to rent out their entire home would be subject to a fine of $1,000 for a first offense and up to $7,500 for a third violation. The law would not apply to people who only rent out a room, while also staying in the apartment themselves.

The bill has been criticized by many of Airbnb’s high-profile investors such as actor Ashton Kutcher and venture capitalist Paul Graham:

Tech is the future of the NY economy, but @NYSA_Majority & @NYSenate might throw it all away with terrible anti-tech bill A8704C/S6340A

— ashton kutcher (@aplusk) June 17, 2016

The @NYSenate is trying to quietly rush through a bill banning Airbnb. If you'd like the decision to be more democratic, tell them.

— Paul Graham (@paulg) June 17, 2016

Renting out an entire apartment for less than a month has already been against the law in New York City since 2011, but this new bill would make advertising for such rentals illegal as well. While the multiple dwelling law that took effect in 2011 was meant to target illegal hotel businesses and landlords who own multiple units, it also made the actions of ordinary people in need of some extra income illegal.

If the new bill is signed into the law, it will not only be bad for the company but would also put 30,000 people in New York City at risk of being evicted, according to a survey conducted by Airbnb. After the bill made its way through the state legislature, company spokesperson Josh Meltzer said in a statement:

It’s disappointing—but not surprising—to see politicians in Albany cut a last-minute deal with the hotel industry that will put 30,000 New Yorkers at greater risk of bankruptcy, eviction or foreclosure.

Airbnb has previously been under fire for its unclear responsibility in cases of guests hosting extreme parties, wrecking people’s homes, sexual assault, prostitution, and even death.

Learn More: Uber, Airbnb: Is the “Sharing Economy” Dangerous?

Linda Rosenthal, a member of the State Assembly the bill’s sponsor, said in a statement:

This bill, once it’s signed into law, will send a strong message that we prioritize hardworking New York families and affordable housing, and will give law enforcement the tools they need to crack down on illegal hotels that destabilize communities and deprive us of precious units of affordable housing.

The next step is to wait for the Governor to either approve or reject the bill, making Airbnb partly illegal or not. If you live in New York you can weigh in on the bill here.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post A New York Bill Could Make Listing Your Home on Airbnb Illegal appeared first on Law Street.

The possibility of government regulation of noncompete clauses in the business world has been a hot topic in recent months – especially throughout the tech industry. Now it seems that the debate has expanded to an array of other smaller industries, including the ever-so-competitive camp counseling field.

According to the New York Times, 19-year-old college student Colette Buser was passed over for a summer counselor job in Wellesley, Mass. in fear that nearby LINX camp would sue. Apparently Buser had a noncompete clause tucked into her contract from the previous summer, which prevented her from working within ten miles of a LINX location. According to the Times, everyone from “chefs to investment fund managers to yoga instructors, employees are increasingly required to sign agreements that prohibit them from working for a company’s rivals.”

LINX tried defending its actions to the Boston Herald, claiming that its training methods are just as crucial as the confidential intel that tech companies using noncompetes have. LINX President Joe Kahn said that the company uses these clauses because they train employees using unique methods and have seen counselors get hired mid-summer as babysitters. “Much like a tech company would be protective of their technology and proprietary information, we’re protective of our customer information,” said Kahn.

Buser is not the only person who has been affected by noncompete clauses recently. According to the Boston Herald there have been plenty of other instances where former employees found themselves in trouble because of a noncompete clause.

• A student trying to intern at a tech firm was requested to sign a one-year noncompete.
• A Massachusetts man whose job involved spraying pesticides on lawns was asked to sign a two-year noncompete agreement.
• A Boston University graduate was asked to sign a one-year noncompete for an entry-level social media job at a marketing firm.
• Phil Poireir, a pastor at a Megachurch in Seattle, was let go because he refused to sign a noncompete contract.
• A hair salon in Norwell, Mass., obtained an injunction requiring hairstylist Daniel McKinnon to stop working at a nearby salon because he had signed a noncompete, which prohibited him from working at any salon in neighboring towns for a year.

In McKinnon’s case, he was forced to live on unemployment benefits for months. “I almost lost my truck, I almost lost my apartment. Almost everything came sweeping out from under me,” McKinnon told the Times.

From the employer’s perspective, noncompete clauses make sense. The company has invested its time and money into training its employees, so it would only be logical to protect those investments. But it seems that some companies are taking it a bit overboard. Can one hairdresser really cause a business to flop? What does it say about your company if you’re trying to scare your employees to stay committed? These are the questions that businesses need to ask themselves when they put noncompete clauses in their employees’ contracts.

Many noncompete clauses put people like Daniel McKinnon out of work for weeks and even months at a time. MIT professor Matthew Marx thinks that people should have the freedom to come and go as they please. “There was a saying at the Silicon Valley startup where I worked, ‘You never stop hiring someone.’ They can go where they want. People are free to leave and start companies if they’re not happy,” Marx said.

Over the past year there has been a 60 percent rise in departing employees who face lawsuits from their former bosses for breaching these agreements, the Wall Street Journal reported. These disputes lead to long, drawn out court battles that impede productivity on both sides of the disagreement.

Many legislators are trying to bar noncompetes in various states throughout the country. State Representative and Vice Chairwoman of the Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development, Lori Ehrlich,  contends that noncompetes are hurting growth in our economy by “decreasing working mobility and squelching startups.”

Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts has proposed a bill that will make it easier for workers in all types of industries to move from one job to another with ease by banning noncompete agreements. These agreements seem to cripple employees’ ability to be innovative, leaving them befuddled and frustrated with their inability to advance.

While the fear that former employees may take confidential information is understandable, companies should sue if, and only if, the former employee is caught doing so, not beforehand. Should their personal knowledge be considered company information? Does that make sense to anyone out there?

Currently, only California and North Dakota ban noncompete clauses according to the Herald. So if you are working for a company and you have a brilliant idea for a new startup, you can go to California or North Dakota and the judge will not honor the agreement. Since startups in North Dakota aren’t exactly booming, I would look to the Golden State.

— Trevor Smith Featured Image Courtesy of [Penn State via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Want to be a Camp Counselor? Better Check Your Noncompete Clause appeared first on Law Street.

Here at Law Street, we love startups (probably because we are one). So of course we furiously followed Interactive week at SXSW. Honestly, while interactive week needs no explanation, I’ll throw a bone for the individuals who’ve been living under a rock. Now Interactive week just ended but to honor its entrepreneurial spirit, I want to highlight startups that are exploding onto the scene and are innovative, cool, maybe a little outrageous, or some combination of the three. Here are the five startups I suggest you keep an eye on:

1. The Cocksman Club

This startup, founded by Ethan Basch, offers a male-only subscription-based condom service that encourages safe sex. Basch offers a variety of membership models, starting at ‘The Player’ (3 condoms for 5 bucks a month) to ‘The Legend’ (a whopping 24 condoms for 20 bucks a month). Frankly, this is a little bizarre and I am having a hard time not laughing, but I can’t knock his entrepreneurial spirit — clearly, someone is buying into this model. Also, I can’t be mad at a startup that uses a little humor to promote safe sex.

2.  Spritz Technology Inc.

Spritz, a personal favorite, is a Boston-based startup that is revolutionizing how one reads. They developed a speed reading technology in 2011 but garnered very little traction until now.  So what is this speed reading technology? Spritz streams one word at a time at various speeds to cut down the amount of time that the eye uses in moving from word to word in a sentence. Theoretically, this allows a person to consume the text at a quicker rate.

Spritz’s main focus is to patent the technology rather than diversifying into app development at the moment, though I doubt that they will stay away from mobile development indefinitely. Currently, Spritz is close to closing 3.5 million in seed money so I can only imagine how they will grow in the coming months.

3.  Ringblingz

Everyone knows that in order to make something go viral or become profitable you have to target teenage girls. In the U.S, teens alone spend $208 billion on themselves. And well, nobody knows this better than Ringblingz. The New York-based startup hopes to tap into this market by offering wearable technology and just debuted their first product: a smart ring. The smart ring can send alerts from your favorite contacts on different social media websites so you don’t have to constantly check your phone. Pretty cool, right? This is just one of many projects coming out. So why should you watch them? Here is the answer: you might have heard of Ringblingz’s founders, Rich and Sheri Schmelzer. Do ugly Croc charms ring a bell? Well, it’s not a secret that I find Croc charms and Crocs, for that matter, to be ugly, but the charms created by Jibbitz were a huge success. There is undeniable business pedigree backing this startup, which makes the company’s future very interesting.

4. Yik Yak

While everyone is freaking out about the new apps Secret and Whisper, you should add Yik Yak to the list. The app follows the new anonymity trend happening across web and mobile development. This startup, founded by two Furman University students, Tyrell Droll and Brooks Buffington, aims to connect through anonymous location-based posts but is definitely geared to college campuses. Yik Yak has already exploded onto the scene with more than 100,000 active monthly users. Also, three words: Juicy Campus Revival. I remember laughing at the crazy posts on Juicy Campus as a college freshman, but also the website had a serious dark, shady side.

So I am not surprised that they have already faced issues and criticism about possibly violating anti-bullying laws. Hopefully the app has continued success and we only see posts about the outrageous, weird, or gut-bustingly hilarious college incidents.

5. Opternative

This is probably the most interesting startup on the list. Opternative is a Chicago-based startup, founded by Dr. Steven Lee and Aaron Dallek, that offers a quick online eye exam for $35. Exams are reviewed by ophthalmologists and you can get digital prescriptions that can be filled anywhere. I don’t know about you but my mind is blown.

Before medical professionals unleash their pitchforks, Dallek wants Opternative to be “not just an online eye exam but the gold standard digital eye exam that doctors could administer in their offices,” according to TechCrunch. Opternative not only wants to revolutionize the standard for eye exams but also, the whole medical process.

You might find these startups weird, crazy, or bizarre but you shouldn’t be surprised that they are here. It is becoming easier to translate ideas into a viable business model. Definitely keep an eye on these five.

—

Ashley Powell (@danceAPdance)

Ashley Powell

Ashley Powell is a founding member of Law Street Media, and its original Lead Editor. She is a graduate of The George Washington University. Contact Ashley at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Watch List: 5 Crazy, Cool, or Just Plain Bizarre Startups to Watch appeared first on Law Street.