ignorance of the law is neither an excuse nor an exception. i've no doubt that mr. chung was aware of the issues involved as he has apparently run afoul of laws and regulations regarding taxi business etc numerous times before. if he wanted to act and earn as a taxi driver, then be a taxi driver and drive a taxi!
it's possible that he could not meet the requirements for a taxi driver, possibly due to his prior record. oh well, stick to your limo service then and stay out of taxi type business opportunities. or, pay the price for it.
the taxi driver has a right to expect that his business and business opportunities will be protected the same as anyone else does. taxi drivers pay a significant portion of their weekly income to their companies for, in part, just that right.
one taxi driver has no ability to defend against loss of business vs. these town car drivers that cross the regulatory line, or the rogue/gypsy taxis operating without proper licenses and or regulatory authority. so it falls to the county and or city regulatory authorities and their enforcement arms to do this. and for that, taxi drivers are likely very appreciative.
taxi drivers in general work long long hours without benefits to make a moderate income in a very competitive marketplace. illegal competition just makes it that much more difficult.
i'm just glad this article didn't show any bias in reporting.... [sarcasm off]