This is especially problematic given that in LA, SF, and NYC AirBnB makes a large fraction (~44%) of its revenue from commercial operators with multiple listings. That is, in these markets nearly half of AirBnB "hosts" are entrepreneurs who are flouting municipal law and obligations for their personal gain and to others' detriments.
Hill offers a few common sense (and in my opinion equitable) actions AirBnB might take to make amends. In a passage worth quoting in context, Hill writes
> Perhaps the biggest tragedy in all this is that at the core of Airbnb is a really good idea. It has cleverly used Web- and app-based technology to bust open a global market that connects tourists with financially strapped homeowners. After interviewing some of Airbnb’s “regular-people” hosts, I’m convinced that this service legitimately does help them make ends meet.
> But by taking such a hands-off, laissez-faire attitude toward the professionalization of hosting by greedy commercial landlords and multiproperty agents, Airbnb has become its own worst enemy. As the number of victims piles up, it undermines its own “sharing and trust” ethos because Airbnb could easily meet cities halfway:
> • With one stroke of the computer mouse, Airbnb could “evict the evictors” — de-list from its website any professional landlords or property managers operating multiple properties as tourist hotels. It has the data and knows who they are.
> • Cooperate with cities like San Francisco, Santa Monica, and Portland, which require hosts to register with local agencies, by de-listing any unregistered hosts.
> • Pay the same hotel occupancy taxes that hotels pay in all 34,000 cities in which Airbnb operates, or collect them from the hosts and turn them over to the cities.
> • Stop refusing to supply the data that cities need to enforce regulations and taxation, including the number of rental nights and rates charged by each host.
EDIT: Remove markup. Readability. Grammar.