See if you can find the words "loose" "loosening" or "enforcement" in that article.

• They simply interpreted how to apply a regulation to dockless bike share vendors -- left unchanged from pilot rules to final rules is the rule that bike share vendors have to provide a list of places to buy helmets.
• Just as they interpreted how to apply a regulation to docked bike share vendor -- vendor had to provide a helmet vending machine at the docks.
• And how to apply a regulation to brick and mortar bike rental vendors -- for rental bikes, shall offer to rent a helmet, for bike sales, shall offer to sell a helmet.

BTW, in Seattle, Pronto (who provided helmet vending machines) failed.

Spin and Ofo (who provided a list of helmet vendors) failed. Ofo failed EVERYWHERE. Spin is scooting away.

Lime and Jump (who provide a list of helmet vendors) seem to be doing OK in Seattle so far.

Lyft has applied to join them in Seattle.


Elsewhere, the helmet law also did not change in Massachusetts *NOR* was it "loosened."

In Massachusetts, bike share vendors are considered to meet the requirement in M.G.L Chapter 85 section 11D where the vendor "shall make available a bicycle helmet" by simply offering a list of places where you can buy a helmet. Same rational decision that has been made in many other jurisdictions.

Bluebikes (formerly Hubway) has a list of helmet vendors but also offers a discounted helmet over this new fangled thing called "the internet". I've never seen that helmet in the wild though, even though many people riding Bluebikes wear helmets.

Lime has a list of helmet vendors in each city/town in Massachusetts where they operate. (They also gave away 25,000 free helmets to the first 25,000 thousand US users who took the "Repect the ride pledge" and promises to distribute 225,000 (not free) helmets worldwide, location and timetable unknown.)

-mr. bill