In June, the Cambridge City Council met to discuss the possibility of introducing regulations that would restrict the ability of Uber and similar services to operate in the city. On the table: a proposal that would place all app-based car services under the jurisdiction of Cambridge’s Hackney Unit, the organization that oversees the fleet of traditional taxis often seen idling in Harvard Square. The new regulations would require Uber drivers to register with the Hackney Unit or face fines, and GPS-based fare calculations, a cornerstone of Uber’s pricing model, would be banned.

Uber has been commenting on developments in the case through a blog entitled “The Cambridge License Commission vs. The People of Cambridge,” and has urged it supporters to get involved. The company is no stranger to controversy, and faces bans and restrictions in cities like Berlin. In August, Uber announced that it had hired David Plouffe, President Barack Obama's 2008 campaign manager, to head its lobbying and public relations efforts as more cities follow Cambridge’s example and attempt to crack down on the service.

But heavy-handed regulations—at least those designed to level the playing field between taxis and Uber by curbing the latter—shouldn’t be allowed the thwart the rise of a service that represents a significant improvement over an outmoded and inefficient system. For many, using Uber is more cost-effective, more convenient, and more efficient than hailing a traditional cab. While no car service should be allowed to operate totally unfettered, governments should promote rather than stifle technological innovation and its manifold benefits.

As with any seismic shift within an industry, new companies will supplant old ones and jobs will be lost, at least temporarily. Uber’s impact on the transportation industry is being felt so acutely precisely because the old system was ripe for disruption. Demand for car services has not dried up—if anything, Uber and other services like Lyft portend an increase in the number of people taking private cars—meaning that higher unemployment and lower profits amongst taxi drivers are likely to be transitory phenomena as many drivers inevitably make the switch to Uber.

That being said, some regulations are obviously necessary from the standpoint of passenger safety and equality. There have been allegations of discrimination by Uber drivers against certain protected classes, including blind individuals. To remedy this issue, the state must ensure ensure equal access to transportation services such as Uber. The company must hold up its end by serving the public good, but Uber should be allowed to compete freely, in Cambridge and in cities around the world.