Monkey Parking and SpotPog could invoke the following Halachos:

Subleasing or re-lending movable objects generally is forbidden unless the first user is certain that the owner does not mind for the secondary user to borrow/sublease it [Choshen Mishpat 342: 1].

In contrast, barring preconditions, as it is more difficult for one to destroy, or lose real estate than movable objects, one who borrows or leases the functionality of real estate for a specific period of time may generally sublease the property to another, provided that the second tenant does not prove more of a risk than the original tenant did to the structure of the property [Choshen Mishpat 316, 363: 10 see Nesivos Hamishpat & Ketzos HaChoshen].

When a borrower or renter legitimately subleases the borrowed/rented property, the proceeds belong to the renter [Choshen Mishpat 363: 10 Rema].

When a borrower or renter illegitimately subleases the borrowed/rented property, the proceeds belong to the owner [Choshen Mishpat 363: 10 Rema].

Additionally, were a renter or borrower to sublease the rented/borrowed real estate, when the owner retains the right to demand the termination of the initial loan/rental at whim, the proceeds of the secondary rental belong to the owner [Choshen Mishpat 316: Rema].

A head-hunter, real estate agent, and matchmaker may charge the beneficiary for having provided him/her information in accordance with local custom [Choshen Mishpat 185: 10].

A citizen of a country is obliged to comply with local civic laws enacted for the benefit of the government or its citizens [Choshen Mishpat 369: 11 Rema].

A Jew is required to adhere to common courtesy even when Halachic Law technically permits a particular activity [RSRH Devarim 33:29].

Once one's fellow extends a significant effort into pursuing a piece of real-state, purchase, job opportunity, it is evil for a second fellow to interfere with the first's pursued opportunity. Instead, the second individual is required to permit the first fellow to choose to consummate the pursuit and rather bother him/herself with attempting to pursue an alternative opportunity. According to the strict letter of the law, the second individual may attempt to overtake the first fellow's pursuit if the opportunity is one of a kind the likes of which the second fellow cannot find an alternative. Nonetheless, it is virtuous for one aspiring for holiness to permit the first fellow to consummate the pursuit even when no alternative exits for the second fellow to pursue for him/herself [Choshen Mishpat 237 ,Shulchan Aruch HaRav Ani Mehapech 13].

A debtor owes numerous creditors money and does not have enough funds to pay them all back. If one creditor grabs some of the debtor's property to cover the debt he/she is owed, he/she can keep it.

Were creditor 1 to grab property of which he/she has a claim upon, on behalf of Creditor 2 instead, Creditor 2 can keep it.

Since Creditor 1 could have grabbed it for him/herself, he/she can grab it for Creditor 2 instead.

However, Creditor 1 cannot grab funds which he/she has no right to grab for him/herself on behalf of Creditor 2 at the expense of the other creditors.

There is a discussion among the Poskim whether creditor 1 can grab funds which he/she has no right to grab for him/herself on behalf of creditor 2 at the expense of the other creditors when creditor 2 hired creditor 1 to do so [Choshen Mishpat 105: 1, 2].

If you paid to park in a spot for two hours, can you leave early and give the spot to someone else? Yes.
Can you rent it out to someone else? Yes - You rented the functionality of the spot for two hours. If you want you could put balloons there too!

The municipality effectively lends you a spot on the street to park your car. Before discussing specific municipal laws, say a friend lent or rented you a spot may you lend or rent out the spot that you borrowed?

If your friend would lend it to you for a specified time period of which he/she could not indiscriminately force you to leave, you should generally be able to lend or rent out the spot during that duration of time so long as there is no reason to assume that the parking spot owner would not want the second individual in the spot. If your friend lent you the spot and allowed him/herself the right to kick you out at his/her discretion, any subletting earnings would belong to your friend

Though the municipality lends you the spot within which you could park your car, they could at any time issue an ordinance, suspend parking rights and order that your car be removed. As such, any "rent earnings" that you would garner from renting the spot should belong to the city.

Hence, earning money from renting out a free municipal parking spot is not an option. Theoretically, the same should apply to the "Pogs" one earns from swapping spots - it's just that Pogs have no value to the city!

What about charging money for providing information?

Theoretically, like a head hunter or real estate agent, one is permitted to charge money for providing a recipient with information. Similarly, as long as an individual is permitted to park in a specific spot, why can't he/she charge another fellow to convince him/her to leave the spot?

As such, both receiving money or Pogs for providing information and agreeing to move out should be permissible.

Of course, Halacha requires one to abide by municipal civic laws enacted for the good of the government or society.

As of the writing of this article, San Francisco has banned the use of Monkey Parking and levies hefty fines on transgressors. SpotPog on the other hand has been hailed by many New York politicians.

Thus, as of now, in San Francisco it is forbidden to use Monkey Parking and in New York it would be permitted to use SpotPog.

If you SpotPogged someone, drove up to his/her spot and found someone else waiting for the spot, may you jump ahead of him/her claiming that you SpotPogged?

What should one do if he/she arranged to SpotPogg someone and sees his/her father passing by looking for a spot for himself?

May you park in between two spots to save one for your married children?

Before we discuss the technicalities of these dilemmas, we will preface our remarks by stating that A Jew is required to adhere to common courtesy even when Halachic Law technically permits a particular activity [Rav Shimshon Rephael Hirsch Devarim 33:29 ].