Everybody loves disruption, except the people who are being disrupted. As Uber, the app-based ride-hailing service, has spread rapidly from its San Francisco home to cities around the world, it has repeatedly faced resistance from incumbent taxi operators, who are often politically influential. Regulators and legislators from Brussels to Beijing have moved to restrict Uber’s operations.

Some of the fiercest opposition has come in Europe, where the culture clash between the remorseless competition of the US tech industry and the locals’ respect for tradition and deference to established interests is especially stark. While Uber’s operations give rise to legitimate questions about safety and congestion, the public interest issues used as pretexts for cracking down on the company are often spurious. The proposed new restrictions in London, which would put Uber at a competitive disadvantage against the city’s black cabs, are a case in point.

Uber has often not helped its own cause. Concerns about the company’s use of data on customers’ movements, allegations that an executive had talked about smearing unfriendly journalists and complaints about its tax planning have made it harder for Uber to win the battle for hearts and minds.