The dispute in the article on the surface has nothing to do with app-hailed for hire vehicles, rather it's a simple contract dispute over the question if the exclusivity in the docked bike share contract also applies to dockless offerings.
To argue that the so called "rideshare" app-hailed hire industry is to blame, is to argue that they're only in the bike share business to keep a lid on it. As a possibility that is a legitimate question, but is there actual evidence to indicate it is the case?
Consider for example, if the goal were to keep a lid on bike share to keep people hailing cars rather than to actually run it as a business, why would they be competing against each other in the bike share realm? Wouldn't one of the companies doing a bad job in an existing city be enough of an impediment?