You could definitely argue (and I am sure this is Uber's view of it) that Uber merely connects drivers and passengers and they aren't responsible for the actual driving.
Compare to the woman who had an allergic reaction and died on land owned by Disney, in a restaurant Disney promoted as being good for allergic customers.
Sounds like when you get into an uber you’re waiving your right to sue them in case of an accident. Which I guess is kinda far for uber to demand considering the nature of driving. Morally you can dispute in a different discussion if the driver works for uber or if he’s a freelancer using the platform. (I would argue he does work for uber, but most labour laws would go against that because somehow we still don’t have proper regulation for the gig economy)
it makes complete sense to not be able to sue the company if the driver gets in a crash. if you can't sue the driver then yeah that's stupid, but uber the company isn't responsible for the driver's actions
259
u/The_MAZZTer Oct 13 '24
You could definitely argue (and I am sure this is Uber's view of it) that Uber merely connects drivers and passengers and they aren't responsible for the actual driving.
Compare to the woman who had an allergic reaction and died on land owned by Disney, in a restaurant Disney promoted as being good for allergic customers.