Some sharing economy firms have adopted a strategy of “regulatory entrepreneurship,” openly violating regulations with the aim of rendering them dead letters. This article argues that in a democracy, regulatory entrepreneurship is a presumptively unethical business strategy. In all but the most corrupt political environments, businesses that seek to change their regulatory environment should do so through the democratic political process, and they should do so without using illegal business practices to build a political constituency. To show this, the article defends a qualified moral obligation for businesspeople to obey the law even in societies that fall short of ideal democracy and that are rife with economic injustice. Owners and managers of successful businesses have strong moral reasons to obey laws concerning resource allocation. Such laws include not only property law, but also tax laws, environmental regulations, and other laws that regulate businesses in competitive markets. The moral reasons to obey such laws apply even to laws that business leaders think unfair or inefficient, provided that the laws in question have reasonable, good faith defenders.

一些共享经济企业采取了“监管创业”的策略，公然违反规定，目的是让其成为一纸空文。本文认为，在民主国家，监管创业是一种推定的不道德的商业策略。在除最腐败的政治环境之外的所有政治环境中，寻求改变监管环境的企业都应该通过民主政治程序来实现，并且不应使用非法商业行为来建立政治选区。为了表明这一点，文章为商人遵守法律的道德义务辩护，即使在不符合理想民主和经济不公正的社会中也是如此。成功企业的所有者和管理者有强烈的道德理由遵守有关资源分配的法律。此类法律不仅包括财产法，还包括税法、环境法规和其他规范竞争市场业务的法律。遵守此类法律的道德理由甚至适用于商业领袖认为不公平或低效的法律，前提是相关法律有合理、善意的捍卫者。