With the increasing number of controversies, Uber’s legal team has no time to look up from its files and breathe for just a moment. It has already been embroiled in a rather sticky lawsuit against Alphabet’s self-driving division Waymo and now a former Lyft driver has filed a class-action lawsuit against the alleged use of the ‘Hell’ program to track their competitor’s drivers back in 2015.
For those unaware, a report allegedly exposing Uber of operating an internal program to track drivers operating on its competitor’s ride-hailing platform surfaced on the interwebs. The $70 billion cab aggregator hasn’t confirmed the existence of any such software, which it was using back in 2015. But, it has been said that Uber built fake accounts on Lyft and exploited a then-known vulnerability to spoof passenger locations and learn about the eight closest Lyft drivers around a certain location.
The massive amounts of data collected through this secret program enabled Uber to track drivers’ individual habits, such as the time when the driver logged into Lyft’s mobile app and locations preferred by them. This also provided them with information on drivers who were using both ride-hailing apps at the same instant. This data enabled them to lure drivers to their own platform by providing attractive incentives and bonus rewards — thus, driving traffic away from Lyft.
The lawsuit against Uber has been filed by former Lyft driver Michael Gonzales in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. His attorneys allege the ride-hailing giant of side-stepping four counts of privacy invasions and unfairly hurting drivers on its competitor, Lyft’s platform. Their practices led to the loss of time and business for drivers in the location being targetted under the Hell program. An excerpt from the lawsuit filing (PDF attached) reads as under:
Uber accomplished this by incentivizing drivers working on both platforms to work primarily for Uber, thereby reducing the supply of Lyft drivers which resulted in increased wait times for Lyft customers and diminished earnings for Lyft drivers.
Gonzales’ lawsuit filing has alleged Uber of violating the Electronic Communication Privacy Act by knowingly collecting, tracking and wrongfully using the collected data. The ride-hailing giant’s practices are also in violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act and Federal Wiretap Act.
The plaintiff can, thus, request the court to instruct Uber to dispense info for the discovery of the existence of such a program within the company. He is seeking a monetary compensation of $5 million from this class action lawsuit. Uber has been provided 21 days to respond to the lawsuit with their plea. We’ve contacted Uber and will update you once we hear back from them.
