back to article Sidecar drags itself out the grave, sues Uber for putting it there

An early entrant to the cab-hailing app market, Sidecar, has sued Uber claiming the cab giant used predatory pricing and fake bookings to put its rival out of business. Sidecar launched in 2012 offering a range of innovative features in its app, including ride-sharing and the ability of ordinary drivers – rather than licensed …

  1. a_yank_lurker Silver badge

    Not sure about this, Uber is not angelic but these charges seem a bit of stretch from a mismanaged company. I never heard of Sidecar before but know of Uber and Lift.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Uber was accused of doing the same against Lyft (I don't know if the suit was eventually settled or is ongoing) so I have little trouble believing such a known to be unethical company wouldn't have done it against other competitors. That you haven't heard of them before may only mean they did a more thorough job against them than they did against Lyft.

      I vaguely remember hearing about Sidecar once or twice. Probably at the Reg.

      1. GruntyMcPugh Silver badge


        You are indeed correct sir;

        Uber have a history of not playing nice with others. As to the claim by the OP Uber are 'mis-managed' they seem to have been very focused when it comes to doing evil.

        1. Pascal Monett Silver badge

          I have no trouble believing that those scum at Uber would sacrifice newborns to increase their market share.

          I hope Sidecar gets its day in court, wins the case and guts Uber for tens of millions of dollars.

  2. Valeyard


    The paying more and charging less I don't realllly have a problem with, but this:

    Uber is accused of developing a system to book Sidecar rides and then cancel them at the last minute in order to disrupt its business and undermine trust in its service.

    I have absolutely no trouble whatsoever in believing

  3. jonty17

    Do they keep Lyft alive in order to not be a monopoly?

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Paying more and charging less... in operating at a loss to destroy competitors is unsustainable and thus a fraud perpetrated on the customer pool and the public at large. If you don't have a problem with it, then you are myopic.

  5. Insert sadsack pun here

    "It wants to be compensated for what it says were monopolistic practices that broke Californian and federal law."

    No, it's not, you're misunderstanding the timeline. Sidecar is saying that Uber engaged in *anti-competitive* practices in the past in order to become a monopolist now. Sidecar did not say that Uber was a monopolist at the time it engaged in anti-competitive practices, and the court doesn't need to find that Uber is or was a monopolist in order to find that its anti-competitive behavoiur caused loss to Sidecar.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020