Al Franken Isn’t Buying Uber’s Explanation For Tracking People

Democratic Sen. Al Franken appears at a get-out-the-vote rally in support for Franken and Minnesota Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minn., Thursday, Oct. 23, 2014. (AP Photo/Ann Heisenfelt)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) on Monday released Uber’s response to his questions on its privacy policies and made clear that he wasn’t satisfied with the company’s answers.

Last month, after it was revealed that a senior Uber executive suggested digging up dirt on journalists while another employee accessed a journalist’s ride logs without her permission, Franken wrote a letter to the company stating that those reports suggested “a troubling disregard for customers’ privacy.” The senator also sent Uber a list of questions clarifying its privacy policies.

Katherine M. Tassi, Uber’s managing counsel for privacy, argued in the response that Uber uses customer data like any other business — “to provide the service, to improve the service, and to run the business.” Those news reports, she wrote, generated “misperceptions about how Uber employees treat the personal data of Uber riders,” and she spent much of the response disputing them.

“In your letter, you suggest that an Uber executive indicated a willingness to use Uber account information of journalists to discredit them,” she wrote to Franken. “If Uber were to engage in any such misuse of journalists’ account information, we agree that it would be a gross invasion of privacy, and a violation of our commitment to our users. Thankfully, that is not the case.”

She also disputed the account of Buzzfeed reporter Johana Bhuiyan, who wrote that Uber employee Josh Mohrer tracked her ride logs without her permission. Tassi wrote that Mohrer pulled the reporter’s trip information because she had taken an Uber car and was 30 minutes late to their meeting, and the company ultimately disciplined Mohrer for doing so.

Uber’s letter did address the use of the company’s so-called God View tool, which reportedly allowed corporate employees to see the locations of Uber vehicles and customers who requested a ride. Tassi wrote that only employees working in operations or other areas that require employees to have a real-time view of rides, like fraud prevention, can access that tool.

But she also wrote that the company shows the tool to third parties because it makes for a “compelling visual display of our business in a city.” In those cases, Tassi wrote, the tool is shown in a “presentation” mode that renders Uber users’ personal data inaccessible.

Tassi also noted that the company hired a data privacy expert to audit its privacy policies. But Franken doesn’t believe Uber’s response adequately explained the scope and enforceability of those policies.

“While I’m pleased that they replied to my letter, I am concerned about the surprising lack of detail in their response,” Franken said in a statement. “Quite frankly, they did not answer many of the questions I posed directly to them. Most importantly, it still remains unclear how Uber defines legitimate business purposes for accessing, retaining, and sharing customer data.”

Read Uber’s response to Franken below:

Uber’s Response To Sen. Al Franken (D-MN)

Latest Livewire
Comments
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: