Uber Sued Over Driver Data Breach, Adding To Legal Woes 32
wabrandsma writes with news about the latest trouble facing Uber. "Uber Technologies Inc has been hit with a proposed class action lawsuit over a recently disclosed data breach involving the personal information of about 50,000 drivers, the latest in a series of legal woes to hit the Internet car service. The suit, filed Thursday in federal court in San Francisco by Sasha Antman, an Uber driver in Portland, Oregon, says the company did not do enough to prevent the 2014 breach and waited too long — about five months — to disclose it. Antman says Uber violated a California law requiring companies to safeguard employee's personal information."
God view (Score:2, Interesting)
Uber, are the company that implements a god view mode to track you using the phone app.
http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2014/11/uber-god-mode-spy-on-you
"It was revealed that Uber employees at the corporate level—not Uber drivers—can track anyone anywhere at anytime using something called 'god view', which doesn't sound terrifying at all. ....A Buzzfeed news reporter, Johana Bhuiyan, claims that she was illegally tracked after she traveled to a meeting with the General Manager of Uber New York,
Re: (Score:3)
> and [stock] Android does not let you withhold the location data
Root your phone and install one of the many granular permission managers.
Invasive data collection (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All that data is probably very useful for the NSA: "Where has target X been driven to?"
Re: (Score:2)
Drivers are not employed by Uber, rather they are employed by the person whom they are giving a lift to. Uber is simply the intermediate of which the two connect to one another - much like a telephone company. On that basis alone this case will flop as Uber does not owe drivers the same duty of care that an employer would owe an employee.
You may be able to outsource the work; but, the responsibility is still yours. Hopefully the courts will see through this shell game fiction.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This "shell game" fiction happens to be the truth of the matter and historically has always been held up by the courts. At no point are the drivers in the employment (directly or otherwise) of Uber. Uber's business is to provide an application platform that connects drivers with passengers. Both of those parties voluntarily use the service that Uber provides in accordance with its Terms of Service. Drivers are no more an employee of Uber than the passengers themselves, ergo, they're not.
To say otherwise is
Re: (Score:2)
fedex try to make there drivers independent contractions and lost in the courts.
Re: (Score:2)
"This "shell game" fiction happens to be the truth of the matter and historically has always been held up by the courts."
Wrong, and the state of California has quite often said "Uh, no, you've improperly classified your employees as independent contractors" using a set of criteria, all of which not necessarily needs to be met, for the standard of 'employee' versus 'contractor' to be determined.
Papa John's tried your same logic - that their customer hired the driver to deliver the pizza, not the employee (he
Re: (Score:1)
The fact that in specific cases firms which have claimed to hire contractors have lost in court and had the contractors re-designated as employees does not logically imply that uber drivers are employees. As others have noted, there are specific criteria against which courts determine if a person designated as a contractor is, in fact an employee. IANAL so I won't speculate as to the outcome other than saying it is hardly a forgone conclusion that Uber drivers are actually employees as a matter of law. T
Re: (Score:1)
you do realize that laws regarding safety of private information apply to anyone who stores them right? it has nothing to do whether the drivers are "employees" or "users" or "clients" or whatever you choose to call them...
No employee data was leaked. (Score:2)
Omg (Score:1)
Will there be no end to the protectionists' backlash?