The relationship between Uber and the United Kingdom remains very complex. Since the London transport regulator decided to withdraw the operating permit from the US company in September 2017, the situation has been ill. Relationship to government, security and company in relation to passengers and drivers. It describes, and in particular, the use of Greyball – the system of staffing settings; Public administration with the aim of avoiding control – the reasons for proofing for the future of Uber in the country. Almost 50,000 drivers were left at a cost of knowing if they were to be carried out, under the control of the multinational population.
In June the same year the ruler and Uber saw each other again in the Courts. Under a passport agreement with Transports for London, Uber was allowed for another 15 months. There would be a reduction in the contractual terms to & # 39; the permanent risk of the entity. Months later, a driver case that wanted to be given as staff was to send a " Put back in check.
Now, there will be another chief chief in manufacturing in the United Kingdom. On the same Tuesday, technology has announced that it must pay almost 400,000 barley (385,000 pounds) as a penalty for the data of 2.7 million users and 82,000 drivers after a cèbear attack. Email addresses, email numbers, hidden numbers, made in 2016, on accessibility; According to the company, bank accounts, cards and Social Security accounts were not disturbed. Similarly, it is the problem that Uber confirmed that he did not tell the bird a year later and that he also paid $ 100,000 for the data that was stolen from the people who killed him. From the Office of the Information Commissioner's Office, Bloomberg has collected "not only did Uber data security failures, but also for consumers and drivers who have been informed stealing personal "
This is not the first fine for technology because of it; data is lost and its & # 39; refusing. The Netherlands is also convicted of Uber for the removal of 2016. In this context, the abduction has already applied to the # 39; first retirement: the highest level of security for Joe Sullivan. This was rejected not only for its error, but for a & # 39; kept hidden for a year.
More articles from Economy and Companies