RIDEGURU
People did see this, right? Can they do this legally? The cars are drivers'.
- Both Uber and Lyft have confirmed that they do not allow drivers to stream or publish videos of passengers.
- In October, Uber took heat after a group of Ottawa Senators hockey players were recorded bad-mouthing a coach by an Uber driver.
- In July, a driver in St. Louis was found to have streamed hundreds of rides on Twitch.
Uber's policies: New guidelines were put into place by Uber at the end of September, the Associated Press reported, and were in effect at the time of the video's publication, a company spokesperson confirmed to the wire service. Drivers are permitted to record rides for security documentation, but may not broadcast or publish the footage.
"Broadcasting a person's image, audio, or video recording is a violation of these terms and may result in loss of account access,"Uber's guidelines state.
Lyft's policies point to local regulations. "Please refer to your city and state's regulations on recording devices when giving rides," its website says. "Some cities or states may require signage making known the presence of recording devices, while other regions may not allow recording devices at all."
Comments
I dont think drivers should be able to publish these videos but what about passengers that video drivers and throw that up on social media? Should work both ways. Both parties can record video and audio but neither should be able to put up on social media sites, news sites, etc... I just put up a thread on a new video that surfaced regarding an Uber driver and a rider.
Isn't that illegal? Yes, the cars are the drivers', and they should be able to do whatever they want in it. They also need to protect themselves and webcams are one of the few ways they do that.
You may be able to record but you cannot post it.
I think the point is you can record, just can't publicize it somehow. Makes sense.
Wouldn't an uber car technically be considered a public space? It's not illegal right? Just against Uber's policy. I guess that makes sense.
I believe there’s a difference between public transportation and cars owned by independent contractors. An inside of a taxi or bus would be public, but an Uber vehicle is an individual’s car, which I believe qualifies it as “public.”
Then again, if we want to talk about the legality of recording someone, we need to be discussing the expectation of privacy, not so much whether it’s called public vs. private.
That’s for recording someone. In terms of sharing with others? I have no idea. Doesn’t the driver own the pic he takes legally in a public place? So can’t he share that with others in any way he likes? (Outside of defamation.)
Yeah, I mean, there's some weird gray areas. If you're in a car, driving down the road, are you in a public space? What if someone films you from the car next to you? What if you have tinted windows? Or, what if you're in a convertible?
Then why do televisions have to blur out people’s faces unless they have permissions?
Oh is it because the footage is being used for commercial purposes?
Remember when Travis Kalanick was videoed ranting to his driver. That was funny.