It’s a rare ray of sunshine for the embattled Uber, as it won a key fight in the U.S. Second Court of Appeals, which ruled its terms and conditions (Ts & Cs) are legally binding, reports Telecoms.com (Paybefore‘s sister publication).
Uber has proved to be a difficult ally to have in recent months with the firm facing constant heat in the press, but many Internet companies (and fintech firms) will be secretly thanking the unlikely hero after the ruling. In short, Uber managed to convince the judges the Ts&Cs were legally binding after a former customer found enough complaint to force the tech giant into the court room.
While this might seem a relatively minor bit of news in the wider picture, the small pebble cast into the sea of digital transformation had the potential for some pretty torrid ripples. Many in Silicon Valley would have been on the edge of their seats waiting for the ruling, which had it gone the other direction, would potentially have opened up numerous companies and apps to public scrutiny and lawsuits from disgruntled customers.
One area of dispute in the Ts & Cs was that any legal dispute would have to be handled privately instead of in the public eye. The individual finding issues, Spencer Meyer, claimed he missed this detail when reading the Ts & Cs, but also accused the company’s business model of being anti-competitive, enabling third-party drivers to fix prices.
“While it may be the case that many users will not bother reading the additional terms, that is the choice the user makes,” says Appeal Judge Denny Chin.
The complaint was initially filed back in 2014, but this slow-moving bullet could have caused some major issues. Chin found that the Ts & Cs were relatively plain, all being on one page, in clear writing, and even though there was a link that directed users to another version, this was made clear by the company. In short, Uber cannot be held responsible because the users are too impatient to read the Ts & Cs.
Aside from destroying Uber’s business model, should the decision have gone the other direction, there would almost certainly be numerous opportunist individuals attempting to cash in on the complicated and murky T s & Cs format. The app economy, as well as the wider business community would have been shaken.
This is a point which was argued by the Internet companies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; a ruling against Uber would slow, stall or slay progress in the digital economy. The ability to enforce online contracts would be called into question removing any legitimacy the companies have.
Whether this puts the issue to bed remains to be seen, but there are opportunist anarchists all around the world. Those who consider multinational businesses the big bad monster hiding in the closet might take a page out of this slow-moving saga and have a pop at Uber or another Internet company in another country. All that’s needed is one victory to turn that ripple into a tidal wave. But for the moment, the U.S. pond remains calm.
“The Second Circuit’s powerful and common sense opinion will serve to protect online contracting and strengthen commerce nationwide,” says Uber’s lawyer, Theodore Boutrous.
- Green Dot and Uber Expand Debit Card Payments for Drivers
- Plaintiff Appeals U.K. Competition Appeal Tribunal Decision in £14 Billion Suit
- U.S. Sen. Warren Questions Big Banks on Arbitration
Image Credits: Shutterstock/wavebreakmedia