Uber Has Been Using a Secretive Program To Identify Enforcement Officers And Prevent Them From Hailing Cars (nytimes.com)

Uber has been using a secretive program to evade authorities for years, particularly at times when city regulators were trying to block the ride-hailing service, according to a new report by the New York Times. From the report: Uber is using a tool called "Greyball" to work identify requests made by certain users and deny them service, according to the report. The application, later renamed the "violation of terms of service" or VTOS program, is said to employ data analysis on info collected by the Uber app to identify individuals violating Uber's terms of service, and blocks riders from being able to hail rides who fall into that category -- including, according to the report, members of code enforcement authorities or city officials who are attempting to gather data about Uber offering service where it's currently prohibited. The report claims that that Uber's "violation of terms of service" or VTOS program, briefly known as Greyball, began around 2014, and has sign-off from Uber's legal team.In a statement, Uber said, "This program denies ride requests to users who are violating our terms of service -- whether that's people aiming to physically harm drivers, competitors looking to disrupt our operations, or opponents who collude with officials on secret 'stings' meant to entrap drivers."

Journalists, putting things in context. Russell Brandom, a reporter at The Verge said, This is the kind of thing a DA would put in front of a judge if they wanted to subpoena Uber's business records for an entire city. Matt Rosoff, editorial director at CNBC Digital added, I've been a tech journalist on and off for 21 years and I can't remember any company having a worse month news cycle-wise than Uber is now.

Comments

Of course they do

[Anonymous Coward]

Their entire business model is based on violating laws so it makes sense they would build tools to make that as easy possible.

Re:Of course they do

[squiggleslash]

Oh bollocks. In the vast majority of cases, the laws that Uber violates existed long before the Internet was ever a twinkle in Al Gore's eye. They exist for the most part to ensure accountability (licensing), fair and predictable service (published fares), and, in some cases such as NYC's medallion system, to prevent already clogged streets from being clogged with more taxis.

Even those cities that passed rules Uber has problems with after Uber's creation did so because Uber was already causing problems with the above pre-existing frameworks.

WIth the exception of cities with quotas (like the medallion system in NYC) the laws in question didn't preclude competition. It was easy to start up a new taxi company - you just had to follow the rules, which weren't hard.

One can argue that the taxi system should have been modernized, but the argument that taxi regulations were created to protect taxis from Uber is utterly ridiculous.

Uber was violating perfectly reasonable laws that existed for perfectly reasonable reasons.

Uber Hit Squad

[phantomfive]

I'm open to the idea that Uber is an evil company, but what's with all the Uber news lately? We've had story after story this week. It isn't normal, even for a company as bad as Oracle, to have news story after news story released like this. The whole thing looks like someone is leaking to the press at an opportune time, which raises the question,

cui bono? I don't know the answer to that, but it must be somebody.

Re:Excellent

[Raisey-raison]

Uber just went up a couple notches in my book!

I completely agree. The whole Greyball program is a feature not a bug. Without an aggressive company the monopoly of taxis in so many cities would never have been broken. The law is on the side of lobbyists who are paid by incumbents to prevent competition. I can't tell you how many times I tried to hail a cab in NYC before Uber and simply could not get one. I have similarly been unable to get a cab without 24 hours notice sometimes in the suburbs. The artificial shortage of taxis in NYC is what economics textbooks use to explain economic rent! It's outrageous that people complain about Uber busting up a deeply unfair system full of unnecessary bureaucracy and regulations.

Re: Excellent

[PoopJuggler]

It's outrageous that people complain about Uber busting up a deeply unfair system full of unnecessary bureaucracy and regulations.

Nobody's complaining about that. What makes Uber suck is that they're no better morally, ethically or economically than the scum in the taxi industry. They're just as predatory and evil.

Re: Excellent

[Demena]

That will not continue. They are attempting monopoly. When they achieve it they will exploit it.

For me being in a taxi means that if there is an accident I am covered every way from Sunday. Regardless of who is at fault, regardless of medical insurance status, irregardless I will be covered and compensated for losses. If I travel in a Uber car, a paying fare, I am not covered at all, not even by the local mandatory third party insurance. A potential disaster.

Calling and using a cab provides limited information to the cab company. Using Uber reports my location (and god knows what else) to Uber 24/7 and I am even paying for the electricity and hardware to do it. While the cops may get such records form the phone company, Uber just demanding, taking them is an insult. Why would anyone sane accept those terms of service?

The intent of Uber is a world wide (or as wide as they can get) monopoly. Its business model is a losing proposition at its current pricing rates. When other alternatives (some better, some worse) have been wiped out it will exploit that monopoly and not only price wise. It will have the capacity to make areas popular or unpopular and all the influence that comes with that.

They are not even subtle about it. You know what "uber" means don't you? Google übermensch and uber alles.