Is Kupkake Korrect?
I don't know whether you read David Kupler's (Y74) monthly komments on the kab trade, but his perceptiveness is unique. His Kupkake's Korner may be written in rhyme, but his Kolumn is not about poetry, but comes from a kab driver whose eyes never miss a thing.
   This month he once again puts his finger on a sensitive button, that of security at the home of some of our most prestigious accounts - Cabot Square. The area has fallen victim to an awful bomb blast once and had a lucky get-out when a lorry packed with explosives failed to detonate within the Square itself. The perpetrators of both incidents have apparently hung up their guns, but have been replaced by an even worse group of terrorists - those who believe that by blowing up themselves and everyone around them, that they will go to Paradise. We all know that the only 'Paradise' they will ever go to is guarded by the Devil, but that is leaving the point. Security is paramount...
   Kupkake's Kolumn in this issue asks why we have to show our 'Bill' when cars (apparently minicabs) seem to just sail through the security cordons? What David is saying is not that we shouldn't be asked for our 'Bills', but that everyone should need ID of some sort. Naturally, the point about minicabs cannot be disagreed with, however, I have heard that several of our drivers are up in arms about having to show our ID "...unless everybody else does."
   I have to say that I have absolutely no objection whatsoever to showing my 'Bill' or Badge whenever requested. I would hope that they ask everyone, but that comes second. We are supposed to be better than the opposition, so how on earth can any licensed driver kick up a fuss about being asked for proof that he is in fact the driver. We all remember the taxi that was blown up outside the TV Centre...
   I recently had a brief chat with one of the Security guards at the Circus entrance to Cabot Square and asked him why they wave some cars through? His reply was that many of the car drivers were recognised as regulars with ID attached to their dashboard. And licensed taxis? "Well," he told me, "as you approach, you all look the same!" He wasn't being facetious.
   Automatically, as I approach the gates I hold my 'Bill' out. I have never been stopped and they always say "thank you." Sure they should check cars - they are plain stupid if they don't - but that 

is not our responsibility. We are licensed taxis and are perceived as having far more intelligence than the opposition. We don't need any of the "I won't do it unless you do too..."
   That's not to say that someone at Cabot Square shouldn't get their finger out and make sure that EVERYONE who goes through those gates is there on legitimate business. But in the meantime, let's just worry about ourselves...

Why Call Sign Refused to Publish the RTL Solicitor's Letter
Call Sign recently received a letter from a partner in the firm of solicitor's who represented Radio Taxis (London) aka RTL or Mountview, in the recent case at the Law Courts where RTL tried to force DaC into handing over the domain name radiotaxis.com. His letter was sent all trade papers - although at the time of printing neither TAXI nor The Cab Driver appear to have published it. It was no more or less than a press release...
   So far only London Taxi Times have gone ahead with publication - hardly surprising, as that paper is owned by RTL! Other papers may well do so at a later date, but Call Sign - which also has access to the true case details - is declining the kind offer!
   Why? Well several words spring to mind - sore losers being just two of them...
   The writer, Razi Mireskandari, seems to be saying that RTL were in the right all along and did everything right except win. Well I'm sorry Razi, but you lost because the judge disagreed with the case you put forward, consequently, by inference, that also means that he agreed with our case.
   I could go into your letter, dissect it and disagree with most of it, but what would be the point. As just one example, you claim that the judge gave RTL leave to appeal; what you don't say is that leave to appeal was refused when it came to the crux of the case - that of intent.
   You claim that the judge's utterances claiming that the case was "interesting" and "not straightforward" automatically made it close. Sorry, but I disagree again, indeed I have yet 

to meet one person who thinks   that you had any chance with this case - in fact my verdict from the Call Sign that you obviously disagree with - "not a hope in Hell" - was pretty spot-on. The case may well have set a precedent - which is why it was interesting - but was the result ever in doubt? Never!
   You also claim that figures quoted of total costs of £250,000 are a gross exaggeration and that total costs of half that would be nearer the truth. DaC have said that theirs came to £100,000 (of which RTL had to pay £90,000), so that means RTL's costs for months and months of ground work on top of a four day case came to just £25,000. That does seem hard to believe, but if true, I guess it proves conclusively that you only get what you pay for...!
   You patronisingly write of RTL's efforts to settle the dispute and how it was DaC that stopped any settlement. It is a pity that RTL didn't take that so far as to accept the original offer of a swap of the domain name in return for their obsolete radio equipment that would have helped us in the short term.
   I think that I'll leave it at my original assessment - your letter smells strongly of being a sore loser and as judges are reputed to say: Case Closed...!

Happy Everything...!
Ok, ok, I get the message! I recently said that rather than upset those whose religious holidays I had missed out, I would leave out that type of greeting altogether. I had one strongly worded letter denouncing my view and at a guess, at least fifty drivers who have spoken to me over the past month who also say that I was wrong!
   Among those drivers, I've had Muslim, Christian, Jewish and no doubt other denominations telling me that I shouldn't stop the custom of wishing Christian drivers a happy Christmas and Jewish drivers a happy Chanukah. I've even spoken to the father of the young Asian lady who started the whole discussion last year. While naturally not disagreeing with his daughter, he accepted that we couldn't wish every religion a happy holiday.
   So I hope the following is accepted in the vein to which it is offered. I hope that those who recently celebrated thirty day fast of Ramadan had a successful one and I wish everyone a Happy Christmas, Chanukah or Eid. If I have missed you out, then accept my apologies and I hope that life goes well for you...

Alan Fisher