Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Crime Privacy Security The Courts

Uber's Investigators Admit To Lying While Digging Up Dirt On Legal Foes (theverge.com) 57

Posted by msmash from the topsy-turvy-world dept.
Andrew J . Hawkins, writing for The Verge: Ergo, the secretive, CIA-linked firm that was paid by Uber to investigate the plaintiff in one of the ride-hail startup's many lawsuits, has now admitted to lying and illegally recording phone calls during its probe, according to Law360. Lawyers for Ergo owned up to the infractions in oral arguments in court Thursday, drawing a rebuke from the judge overseeing the case. Last December, Spencer Meyer filed a proposed class action lawsuit against Uber CEO Travis Kalanick, alleging a scheme to fix prices in violation of antitrust laws. The same day, Uber hired Ergo to investigate Meyer out of concern he posed a security risk to Kalanick. But Ergo also gathered information on Meyer's lawyer, a move that some critics say went too far. Ergo's lawyer argued that the firm was unaware the investigation was tied to a lawsuit, even while admitting Ergo's investigator "dissembled and used false pretenses in his duties," Law360 said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Uber's Investigators Admit To Lying While Digging Up Dirt On Legal Foes More

Uber's Investigators Admit To Lying While Digging Up Dirt On Legal Foes

Comments Filter:

  • Haven't we learned about Uber yet? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by LynnwoodRooster ( 966895 ) on Saturday July 16, 2016 @03:40PM (#52525333) Journal
    Laws mean nothing to them... Disruptive! $60 billion valuation! Disruptive!

  • honesty (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jmcvetta ( 153563 ) on Saturday July 16, 2016 @03:43PM (#52525345)

    Honesty is for commoners. Law enforcers and similar running dogs of the oligarchy are expected and encouraged to lie whenever expedient.

    • It's not about honesty (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Saturday July 16, 2016 @04:27PM (#52525473)
      Uber can do terrible things and be Honest. Instead focus on how they break the perceived social contract between employee and employer. If you worked hard and played by the rules your employer would take care of you and let you have an OK life and die reasonably content. Whether this was true or not it's _suppose_ to be true. Uber breaks all that and so far nobody's noticed or cared.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by khallow ( 566160 )

        Instead focus on how they break the perceived social contract between employee and employer. If you worked hard and played by the rules your employer would take care of you and let you have an OK life and die reasonably content.

        There's several things to note here. First, I doubt Uber perceives things the same way. If they perceive the "perceived social contract" differently, then what's to say that your perception of it is better than theirs? I doubt most people involved with Uber think of it as a cradle to grave service and hence, don't perceive this alleged contract. Maybe you shouldn't either?

        Nor has this perceived contract existed for the entirety of humanity's existence. I feel this is just like claiming that Valentine's D

        • but the effect is the same. The phrase you're looking for is "Job Creators". That's what the 1% call the social contract. It's a different slant on the narrative (a right wing one as opposed to a left wing one) but it's effectively the same base narrative. To wit: If you work hard and play by the rules you'll do good.

          And when did I mention human history? If you wanna go back further life was nasty, brutish and short. We had 1200 years of dark ages when there was literally no human progress so that a luc

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by khallow ( 566160 )

            The phrase you're looking for is "Job Creators". That's what the 1% call the social contract. It's a different slant on the narrative (a right wing one as opposed to a left wing one) but it's effectively the same base narrative. To wit: If you work hard and play by the rules you'll do good.

            Sorry, you're the only one here spinning tales. I merely pointed out that your "narrative" was deeply broken. I don't care who you plan to blame for it.

            That they're not following the contract is readily demonstrable. Again, this has nothing to do with reality. This is a narrative. Uber pays about $12/hr with no benefits after accounting for the cost of a vehicle. Less if you're city's median income is lower. You can't buy a house, pay for a child's college or save for retirement with that. You can google the statistics to prove that. I can't be arsed right now.

            Uber doesn't follow an imaginary contract by imaginary villains in an imaginary narrative? Do tell!

            As to your other claim, money is still fungible, even if it comes from Uber. You can indeed buy a house, pay for a child's education, or save for retirement with that money just like any other money you happen to earn.

            The point is we're being fed a load of old bull. We're being tricked. The gains the working class made (and fought and died for) are being taken away and we're gradually slipping into a new dark age. Thanks a lot.

            A "dark age" which, let us note, involve

            • you're right the narrative is deeply broken. That's true as well. Employers don't really take care of employees and they cheerfully throw them to the wolves first chance they get. That's not the point. The point is we as a society let them get away with murder in service to that narrative.

              Again, the claim isn't debatable. Any honest economist will tell you $12/hr isn't enough for those things. Take note of what I choose to list. It's all things that relate to long term economic security. Again, go do so

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by khallow ( 566160 )

                The point is we as a society let them get away with murder in service to that narrative.

                If it's actual murder rather than imaginary murder, then there are laws for that. You have to have some sort of intent to kill and of course, the actual killing of a person to go with that. OTOH, if you just want to kill rich people without regard for due diligence or law, then that is murder.

                Again, the claim isn't debatable. Any honest economist will tell you $12/hr isn't enough for those things. Take note of what I choose to list. It's all things that relate to long term economic security. Again, go do some googling. Read the fark politics tab for a few weeks. It'll do you some good to find out how awful the world really is for 90% of the human race.

                There are several flaws with your argument. First, $12 per hour is quite a bit of money especially when coupled with other income. At full time, that's $24k per year which is plenty for the various "long term economic

                • It was completely clear from context I was speaking metaphorically. You're building a straw man to dodge issues.

                  Again, $12/hr is not quite a bit of money. Spend some time on google looking at prices across the country. Ask yourself what it costs to raise a child (something most of society agrees anyone should be able to do). Look up what even an 800 sq/ft home costs, let alone a 1200 sq/ft home.

                  What _preceeded_ the Dark Ages was the collapse of Rome. What _caused_ them was conservativism used to prev

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by khallow ( 566160 )

                    It was completely clear from context I was speaking metaphorically.

                    And it's clear from context, that I thought your metaphor was overblown puffery with no place in a rational discussion by looking at it logically rather than with touchie feelie metaphor.

                    Again, $12/hr is not quite a bit of money.

                    It doesn't have to be a lot of money. The expenses you mention shouldn't be that expensive in the first place. It's not Uber's place to fix that either.

                    And finally, what's the point of this observation? Even if we were to accept that these items need to be as expensive as they are, it still doesn't change that your labor

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by khallow ( 566160 )

                    I'll tell you the same thing I tell everybody else: Go Read "A people's history of the United States". Read some Gore Vidal too while you're at it. Listen to what Bill Nye tells adults when the kids aren't around. You and people like you are dragging us all down. If that's you're goal (e.g. if you're a shill for the 1%) Bravo Sir, you're doing a fine job. But if you have the slightest bit of human decency in you stop being foolish.

                    And in rebuttal, I direct you to this link [nasa.gov]. Some aspects of humanity's enormous progress in the recent past can't be hidden by naked propaganda and fools. Here, the lighting of the night is one of the most noticeable human activities from space. And it depends on growing human wealth. You can't have light without the technology to make light, the considerable infrastructure to manufacture and support those light sources, and the people wealthy enough to have such outdoor light sources.

      • Instead focus on how they break the perceived social contract between employee and employer.

        Uber didn't do this. It was already broken.

  • Whenever Uber hits the news, it disgusts me more. Not that i'm against the core notion; I think it's great, but Uber's top management are scumbags and I have never used them, and don't plan to. I'll happily use some other similar company, just not Uber.

Slashdot Top Deals

Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!

Close