Uber Has a Playbook For Sabotaging Lyft, Says Report 182
Nerval's Lobster (2598977) writes The folks over at The Verge claim that "Uber is arming teams of independent contractors with burner phones and credit cards as part of its sophisticated effort to undermine Lyft and other competitors." Interviews and documents apparently show Uber reps ordering and canceling Lyft rides by the thousands, following a playbook with advice designed to prevent Lyft from flagging their accounts. 'Uber appears to be replicating its program across the country. One email obtained by The Verge links to an online form for requesting burner phones, credit cards, and driver kits — everything an Uber driver needs to get started, which recruiters often carry with them.' Is this an example of legal-but-hard-hitting business tactics, or is Uber overstepping its bounds? The so-called sharing economy seems just as cutthroat — if not more so — than any other industry out there.
Not Sharing (Score:5, Insightful)
The so-called sharing economy seems just as cutthroat
If more money than the partial cost of gas changes hands it is no longer sharing.
Same as it ever was (Score:4, Insightful)
or
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss"
I think the the Talking Heads and The Who said it all.
My view: If you catch the crest of the wave of the various "sharing economy" services that are popping up, like AirBnB or Uber, you will likely have a good experience. But as they grow and other pressures come to the fore, thus poisoning the well, it's time to get out and move on.
How is this not conspiracy to commit fraud? (Score:5, Insightful)
...or am I missing something?
Re:Illegal (Score:5, Insightful)
ToS violation? (Score:4, Insightful)
As much as I hate to see it used, a Terms of Service (ToS) violation and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) may still apply especially since they are using tactics to avoid detection (aka use of "burner phones" and credit card numbers)
It may also be a violation of the various credit card companies' ToS as well.
Rinse, Repeat (Score:5, Insightful)
Hilarious. No, not the shady tactics - the fact that companies like Uber and Lyft whine about being regulated as taxi services, arguing that they are not taxi services, then getting into the same sort of idiotic, self-harming feuds that forced the government to start regulating taxi services.
History, on a loop!
Re:Not Sharing (Score:5, Insightful)
How about this. If you are making a profit from taking someone where they want to go it is no longer sharing it is working.
ordering without intent is called fraud (Score:4, Insightful)
That is almost certainly illegal. If nothing else, it'd be tortuous interference, clearly designed to harm. Using burner phones is contributory evidence to fraud by showing mal intent.
screw both of them, call a taxi. (Score:4, Insightful)
I hate hipsters, assholes, and golddiggers. And I hate people that try to get ahead by stepping on other people's heads.
Watching the fight between Uber and Lyft, it feels like the appropriate way to do a little bit of social good is simply calling Yellow Cab.
Strange choice of enemy (Score:5, Insightful)
You would think that Lyft was the last people that Uber has to worry about with all the entrenched taxi monopolies and the regulators after their blood.
Regulation (Score:4, Insightful)
It's almost like, if you don't regulate taxis, then they do all kinds of nasty stuff you wouldn't want them doing!
Re:How is this not conspiracy to commit fraud? (Score:4, Insightful)
Probably can't get them for criminal fraud, but civil fraud [wikipedia.org] or tortious interference [wikipedia.org] would probably apply.
Being a dick may not be a crime, but sometimes it's a tort.
Re:Illegal (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Illegal (Score:5, Insightful)
well, what happens is that non-Uber taxi's go away, then you get Uber charging higher and higher prices, and pay their drivers less and less.
It's basically rebooting the taxi system.
Those who don't remember history are doomed to repeat it. Only now with computers.