The EU Court of Justice yesterday ruled that e-bikes are actually bikes, not motorbikes, which means e-cyclists aren’t obligated to be insured in the same way as motorists.
I'm sure that if you see the fine print, this means that pedal-assist ebikes that have 250W motor and are limited to 25kph (15mph) are considered bicycles. Something like a Surron is still considered a motorbike and needs to be registerated, insured, needs a licence and is only allowed to be driven on the roads among cars - as they should.
That's not a fine print, that's a definition for ebikes. Surron is 100% a motorbike. They don't even look like bicycles and never targeted the bicycle market.
It's a spectrum and the limits are quite arbitrary. Plenty of people would agree that Surron is a motorbike, but some of those same people want to be able to drive without pedaling, have more powerful motor than 250W, go faster than 25kph or all of the above.
Sounds exactly how it was regulated in Germany, except for the license I think. It's pretty much handled the same as a moped, which I think is totally fair.
I sure would like to read the actual ruling, but from what I see in the article, this applies to pedal assist e-bikes, and wouldn't apply to e-bikes that have a throttle which is operated by a way other than pedaling (like a thumb or twist throttle). I have to think there's a maximum speed and/or weight as well, otherwise someone could very easily build a large, heavy, highway-ready "e-bike" that just uses pedaling for the throttle, but is in every other way an electric motorcycle.
Of course EU regulations, contrary to the US, limit pedal-assist bikes to a maximum continuous rated power of no more than 250 W and a speed to 25 km/h before cutting out power, leaving you to rely your legs for more speed.