Uber tries to sell on the same, simplistic narrative: We're disruptive, we're good! Berlin for example has a very different Taxi market - it's mostly small players, 1-3 cars (there's roughly 7600 taxi in Berlin, distributed over around 3000 companies). Still, Uber tries to sell based on "we're breaking a monopoly" while skirting the regulation and strong-arming the competition.

The recent injunction against Uber in Berlin is ignored by Uber and the taxi company that fought for it in court stated that they won't pursue that since Uber threatend to countersue for damages, effectively threatening to use their funding as leverage over a company that owns three cars.

The case you're citing is also a bit problematic: Italy is a bit a problematic state when it comes to threatening and lack of help from courts. The same thing could happen to an economist and professor writing an editorial advocating against Uber - just not by taxi drivers, but by Uber drivers. I'd blame that on Italy, not on Taxis.