Professor Stemler is a leading scholar on the sharing economy and has published multiple articles on the subject, including in the Emory Law Journal and the Maryland Law Review. She is also a practicing attorney, consultant, entrepreneur (she sold her first business at age 29), avid traveler, and blogger (www.themillennialprof.com), all of which helps her bring real world examples into the classroom. Professor Stemler earned her J.D. from the Maurer School of Law and M.B.A. from the Kelley School of Business. Her research interests focus on the regulatory complexities and possibilities of innovation in the high-tech sector. She currently teaches a variety of courses including entrepreneurship law, business law, and critical thinking.
Industry Expertise (1)
Areas of Expertise (5)
William G. Panschar Undergraduate Teaching Excellence Award
Order of the Coif
John Edwards Fellowship
Phi Beta Kappa
Indiana University Maurer School of Law: J.D. 2011
Indiana University, Kelley School of Business: M.B.A., Business Administration 2011
Indiana University-Bloomington: B.A., Anthropology of Mental Health and Illness (self-created); Psychology; Liberal Arts and Management Program (LAMP) 2008
Media Appearances (4)
Is the heyday of ride-hailing companies over?
Uber and Lyft lost their battle with New York City on Wednesday, and customers may be next as the ride-hailing companies warn it could lead to higher prices and longer wait times for riders.
New York City's Cap on Number of Uber and Lyft Drivers Will Fuel a Renewed Look at Public Transportation, Help Taxi Drivers, Says IU Expert
Abbey Stemler, assistant professor of business law and ethics at the Indiana University Kelley School of Business and a legal expert on the sharing economy, cheers Wednesday’s vote by the New York City Council to place a one-year cap on the number of ride-hailing services vehicles from Uber, Lyft and other ridesharing platforms.
Research reveals sharing economy 'myth,' argues for regulation of firms such as Uber, Airbnb
News at IU Bloomington online
States and communities have struggled to protect consumers through regulation of ride-sharing and short-term rental companies such as Uber and Airbnb, because these businesses have successfully used rhetoric and their users to perpetuate a "myth" that their mission is primarily altruistic.
Abbey Stemler is IU's new student trustee
IU Newsroom online
Abbey Stemler, a second-year law student at the IU Maurer School of Law, has been appointed by Gov. Mitch Daniels as the new student member of the Indiana University Board of Trustees.
Airbnb, Uber, Eatwith, and other sharing economy2 platforms facilitate short-term rentals, transportation, meals, and even pet-sharing. The platforms in the sharing economy use technology to connect people who have private excess capacity to those who want to purchase it. Rather than staying in a hotel, customers can stay in a spare bedroom through Airbnb; rather than hiring moving companies, customers can get help moving via TaskRabbit; rather than going to a restaurant, customers can have a meal prepared for them in someone's home via Eatwith. TIME Magazine listed the sharing economy as one of the ten ideas that will change the world, 3 and Forbes estimates that the revenue flowing through the sharing economy surpassed $3.5 billion in 2013, with growth exceeding twenty-five percent per year. 4 At that rate, peerto-peer sharing has moved beyond a fringe movement and into a disruptive economic …
Thousands of rooms, houses, yurts, and castles are reserved on Airbnb each day. Soon-to-be travelers, who are sometimes thousands of miles away from their future resting places, make their selections based on host-provided descriptions, pictures, and former guest reviews. The latter are essential for building trust and giving travelers the confidence they need to interact with strangers. These feedback loops or reputation systems make up part of the" real innovation" of the Sharing Economy. Airbnb is a company that built an online marketplace that allows people to list and rent unique accommodations around the world.
A deflated air mattress rests in the corner ofAirbnb's world headquarters. It symbolizes how Airbnb allows regular, local people to earn extra income by renting out space in their homes. Yet, this symbolism fails to represent what the company has become-a unicorn receiving much of its revenue from professionals with full-time listings. The poorly folded wad of plastic exemplifies the Myth of the Sharing Economy, which has been consistently used to subvert regulation. The Myth convinces people that the sharing economy is comprised of selfregulating Platforms, which allow microentrepreneurs to utilize their excess capacity in an altruistic manner. However, the sharing economy is actually comprised of companies driven as much by market forces and failures as any taxicab company or hotel chain. The Myth possesses an appeal that is simple and seductive. It takes the familiar idea of sharing to make the claim that …
Throughout history, disruptive technologies have transformed industry and signaled the destruction or creation of regulatory structures. When crafting regulations, governments often utilize Regulation 1.0 approaches, characterized by top-down design standards that dictate exactly how the regulated must act in order to prevent market failures. Regulation 1.0 increases barriers to entry and decreases the room for business experimentation. Regulation 2.0, by contrast, is a theoretical approach for regulating companies that rely on platformmediated networks. It marries New Governance theory and the concept of lex informatica. This marriage allows for the collaborative creation of design standards that are then enforced through mediating technologies. Regulation 2.0 is ideal for regulating the sharing economy in particular, as it is powered by technology-driven feedback loops. The shift from Regulation 1.0 to …
Abbey R. Stemler
On April 5, 2012, President Barack Obama signed into law the Jumpstart Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act, dramatically changing the landscape for many companies raising capital. One of the most interesting sections of the Act is Title III, the CROWDFUND Act, which enables entrepreneurs and small business owners to sell limited amounts of equity in their companies to a large number of investors via social networks and various Internet platforms. Prior to the CROWDFUND Act, selling equity interests in companies via crowdfunding was for all practical purposes illegal under United States securities laws. The Act attempts to exempt crowdfunding from expensive registration requirements and allow crowdfunding websites to avoid the classification of broker, which would impose substantial registration costs on such sites. Through the CROWDFUND Act, equity-based crowdfunding has the potential to open funding opportunities to countless underfunded entrepreneurs and small businesses. In addition, it can provide investors with new ways to diversify their portfolios. However, the benefits of crowdfunding do not come without substantial risks. Given the combination of unsophisticated investors, inherently risky businesses, and the zeitgeist that changed regulations quickly, crowdfunding must be approached with caution.