# Driver livestreams on twitch - Everyone is freaking out about this



## Trump Economics (Jul 29, 2015)

*







Driver for Uber and Lyft live-streamed hundreds of riders on Twitch without their consent*

An Uber and Lyft driver in St. Louis, Missouri has given around 700 rides since March 2018, and nearly all of them have been live-streamed on Twitch, without passenger consent. In a lengthy report, the _St. Louis Post-Dispatch_ detailed the actions of Jason Gargac, a 32-year ride-hailing driver who took advantage of Missouri's one-party consent laws to build up a Twitch following by live-streaming passengers - including children. At times, Gargac has inadvertently revealed the full names of his riders and what their homes and neighborhoods looked like on his channel, under the online handle "JustSmurf."

Gargac isn't the first driver to live stream his or her passengers on Twitch; the man says he stumbled onto the trend while surfing Twitch and decided to try it himself. He is, however, one of the few, if not the only one in Missouri, to do so without asking for permission first. (Other "IRL" ride-hailing live streamers often lose passengers the minute they disclose they're streaming, the report notes.) Gargac has a $3,000 camera setup, including rear-facing and front-facing cameras that show the interior of the car and the environment he's driving in. He has about 4,350 Twitch followers, and around 100 of them pay a minimum of $5 a month to subscribe to his channel and support it financially.

*GARGAC CAN RECORD PASSENGERS WITHOUT PERMISSION THANKS TO MISSOURI'S ONE-PARTY CONSENT LAW*

Though many of his interactions with passengers are congenial or comical, with Gargac befriending his passengers, his online following can be less pleasant. Viewers sometimes mock individuals, rate the attractiveness of female passengers, and largely push the limits of what's acceptable on Twitch. Gargac told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that he was forced to create on-screen graphics to prevent his viewers from selectively "clipping," or editing out short clips and upskirt shots of female passengers. He's also had to mute his microphones when addresses or sensitive personal information is disclosed on his stream, but he must he do so preemptively and cannot completely control what information might slip through to his viewers.

"I have sex in my bedroom. I don't have sex in strangers' cars," Gargac told the paper in an interview, commenting on the expectations of privacy one has in someone else's vehicle. "Because I have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the bedroom in my own house. I don't have that in a stranger's car." Gargac also says the live stream provides him security. "If something happens, immediately there can be a response versus hopefully you'll find my truck in a ditch three weeks later," he said. However, he did confirm that he started his Lyft and Uber accounts for the sole purpose of streaming passengers on Twitch. "I love doing it," he concluded.

According to Missouri state law, Uber, and Lyft, Gargac is in the clear. Because he is not breaking one-party consent laws, the state can't do anything about his recording of passengers without their permission. Neither Uber or Lyft told the _St. Louis Post-Dispatch _that Gargac was breaking any of their terms, with both companies noting that drivers are responsible for following local laws. "Recording passengers without their consent is illegal in some states, but not Missouri," Uber told the paper in a statement.
*
https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/21/17598220/uber-lyft-driver-livestreamed-hundreds-of-riders-without-consent*


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

He is not being paid to Host Amateur Reality Hour.

Uber needs to ban him.

Riders dont need this.


----------



## IthurstwhenIP (Jan 12, 2018)

#onestardashcam


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

IthurstwhenIP said:


> #onestardashcam


It would become an " Endoscope " if i discovered him broadcasting me.

Webcast Colonoscopy.

Idiot Spent $3,500.00 on camera.

.


----------



## Trump Economics (Jul 29, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> He is not being paid to Host Amateur Reality Hour.
> 
> Uber needs to ban him.
> 
> Riders dont need this.


Let's be fair - Uber drivers don't get paid.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> He is not being paid to Host Amateur Reality Hour.
> 
> Uber needs to ban him.
> 
> Riders dont need this.


I agree, and Lyft has already deactivated him. Uber has suspended him pending a "review of his suitability." I can't imagine Uber keeping him after Lyft has deactivated him.

In addition, he is trying to get hired as a police officer (been seeking a job for a year). This certainly is not going to help him; it would disqualify him with many agencies.


----------



## njn (Jan 23, 2016)

Uber's pissed because he was monetizing the videos on twich without giving uber their cut.

Next they will go after the youtube content creators that drive and film.


----------



## KellyC (May 8, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> He is not being paid to Host Amateur Reality Hour.
> 
> Uber needs to ban him.
> 
> Riders dont need this.


Drivers don't either. Now pax will be suspicious of all cameras in Ubers.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

Technically he did nothing wrong or illegal.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

uberdriverfornow said:


> Technically he did nothing wrong or illegal.


He did nothing illegal.

Whether he did anything "wrong" depends on the context. Did he do anything that _technically_ violates the TOS? He did not violate anything that is _specifically enumerated_ in the TOS. But the companies don't have to give any reason for deactivating him, which they have both already done.

Either way, he will _technically_ have zero bank deposits from Uber and Lyft on Wednesday and will have to search for a new path to fame and fortune.

The bottom line here, as I've said on numerous dashcam threads, is that the Google-smart legalistic arguments about consent and "expectation of privacy" are irrelevant. What matters to US is what the companies might do if there is a dashcam issue.

The prudent driver will a) know and comply with applicable laws, and b) use at least _some_ common sense about what you do with recordings.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

One simple basic rule of being a driver: don't piss off the pax to the point that they complain.

Right or wrong doesn't seem to matter with these companies. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, so don't squeak!


----------



## Rakos (Sep 2, 2014)

JimKE said:


> He did nothing illegal.
> 
> Whether he did anything "wrong" depends on the context. Did he do anything that _technically_ violates the TOS? He did not violate anything that is _specifically enumerated_ in the TOS. But the companies don't have to give any reason for deactivating him, which they have both already done.
> 
> ...


Looks like he got his 15 minutes of fame...

Too bad he already cashed in his due...8>)

Rakos


----------



## KellyC (May 8, 2017)

Mista T said:


> One simple basic rule of being a driver: don't piss off the pax to the point that they complain.
> 
> Right or wrong doesn't seem to matter with these companies. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, so don't squeak!


Honestly, I think it is wrong to livestream all of your pax w/o their consent so a bunch of pimple-faced yahoos can make sexual comments about them.

If someone wants to livestream rides for $, fine, just get the pax's consent first.


----------



## njn (Jan 23, 2016)

In fairness, he did have consent by posting a notice sticker.


----------



## JimKE (Oct 28, 2016)

njn said:


> In fairness, he did have consent by posting a notice sticker.


In fairness, you are correct.

In the real world, *he's deactivated* by both companies.

We can have all the enthralling academic/Google-Legal/philosophical discussions we want -- *HE's DONE.*


----------



## KellyC (May 8, 2017)

njn said:


> In fairness, he did have consent by posting a notice sticker.


It was on the back of the car, on the outside (he drove at night), & most importantly it doesn't mention broadcasting or sharing the video/audio online.

Not sufficient for consent, sorry.


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

njn said:


> In fairness, he did have consent by posting a notice sticker.


I think these signs can be challenged as I see most big corporations switching to a big monitor at the front door clearly showing you are being recorded

I used to think it was to prevent shoplifting but now I think it's a creative way to get consent you are being recorded.

It could be he said she said and the only way to be sure is to get verbal consent on video or something in writing but that's just asking for arguement on most rides


----------



## KellyC (May 8, 2017)

Kodyhead said:


> I think these signs can be challenged as I see most big corporations switching to a big monitor at the front door clearly showing you are being recorded
> 
> I used to think it was to prevent shoplifting but now I think it's a creative way to get consent you are being recorded.
> 
> It could be he said she said and the only way to be sure is to get verbal consent on video or something in writing but that's just asking for arguement on most rides


it's telling that the article about him says he watched other rideshare drivers' livestreams, & noticed that they lost some rides when they asked for consent to livestream pax. So he decided not to ask.


----------



## Kodyhead (May 26, 2015)

JimKE said:


> In fairness, you are correct.
> 
> In the real world, *he's deactivated* by both companies.
> 
> We can have all the enthralling academic/Google-Legal/philosophical discussions we want -- *HE's DONE.*


With a name like that, I am guessing he has an unwanted Google tattoo for the rest of his life whenever someone searches his name lol



KellyC said:


> it's telling that the article about him says he watched other rideshare drivers' livestreams, & noticed that they lost some rides when they asked for consent to livestream pax. So he decided not to ask.


Most people if not all dont want to be recorded or have data collected on them if asked


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

KellyC said:


> it's telling that the article about him says he watched other rideshare drivers' livestreams, & noticed that they lost some rides when they asked for consent to livestream pax. So he decided not to ask.


I watched people lose money by paying their taxes. I don't want to lose money, so I should stop paying taxes, lol.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

People put a amazon alexa in their house and don't give it a second thought. Recorded in a car that doesn't belong to them and they loose their minds.



Kodyhead said:


> With a name like that, I am guessing he has an unwanted Google tattoo for the rest of his life whenever someone searches his name lol
> 
> Most people if not all dont want to be recorded or have data collected on them if asked


So are most people ok with being recorded as long as their not asked.


----------



## Uberdriver2710 (Jul 15, 2015)

two words...

'blow back'


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

I knew I was doing the right thing by going without a camera


----------



## Steve appleby (May 30, 2015)

in my state its two party consent. but I really dont care.I have 2 dashcams in my car, one on the front, and one on the back. but they all face outside the car for safety reasons. by entering my car you are consenting to being recorded. If you dont like it, get out of my car. $crew your opinions. simple as that.


----------



## Cableguynoe (Feb 14, 2017)

Steve appleby said:


> If you dont like it, get out of my car. $crew your opinions. simple as that.


Relax buddy. 
You mad bro?

The issue here is live streaming, not recording.


----------



## 58756 (May 30, 2016)

I recorded pax and posted to Yourtube but their faces ain't visible. Also what the heck is he putting weirdo purple lights in there for?


----------



## Jo3030 (Jan 2, 2016)

Weirdo purple lights were to be able to 'lighten up the car' without being too obvious.


----------



## 1971 (Jul 25, 2018)

worried about privacy but no care at all the driver is being paid illegal wages on every trip that doesn't go 10+ miles & for some reason don't realize soon as they realize their dreams & get rid of the creepy dangerous criminal drivers getting $3.37 an hour that the self driving cars will also be recording them & the kinect type cameras & sensors will track eye movement for ad placement, facial recognition for warrant scans, will be able to tell your tempature, heart beat & of course is needed because how else are they going to bill for the snot wiped on the seats, hair grease on windows, & condoms left on floor? self driving cars wont clean themselves doh



we are way past wall e + Idiocracy at this point

enemy of perfect is good enough its ALWAYS going to least cost $10ish dollars in human or robot costs to drive 1-5+ miles in a 2000+pound vehicle, pick up 100-500+ pounds & deliver it 1-5+ miles simple physics & math throw in a respectable tip $11-$15

until they start charging minimum $10+ dollars for rides like people gave nearby friends 25+ years ago for gas money not strangers far away, this ride "share" is a scam

you can never make it up in volume selling at a loss

lets see how many people still go on there 1-5 mile trips when they cost $10+ per

i dont know why anyone would want customers that cant afford the service since when were poor people supposed to have chauffeurs?


----------



## MadTownUberD (Mar 11, 2017)

KellyC said:


> Honestly, I think it is wrong to livestream all of your pax w/o their consent so a bunch of pimple-faced yahoos can make sexual comments about them.
> 
> If someone wants to livestream rides for $, fine, just get the pax's consent first.


May we have your consent to make sexual comments?


----------



## KD_LA (Aug 16, 2017)

As someone who just binge-watched the latest season of _Better Call Saul_... I'm freaking out over this bigly: I don't get to follow the adventures of JustSmurf anymore!








(Fine print: I do not condone what he did, I do have dashcams in my car for safety/protection, and I do have dashcam warning signs)



MadTownUberD said:


> May we have your consent to make sexual comments?


As long as you _comment_ right: 1, 2, 123, 3, 5...


----------



## TeleSki (Dec 4, 2014)

Steve appleby said:


> in my state its two party consent. but I really dont care.I have 2 dashcams in my car, one on the front, and one on the back. but they all face outside the car for safety reasons. by entering my car you are consenting to being recorded. If you dont like it, get out of my car. $crew your opinions. simple as that.


Recording and broadcasting are two different things.


----------



## Nonya busy (May 18, 2017)

tohunt4me said:


> He is not being paid to Host Amateur Reality Hour.
> 
> Uber needs to ban him.
> 
> Riders dont need this.


*Pay drivers more and they will have something to lose. At those rates, everything is fare game!!!!*



Trump Economics said:


> *
> View attachment 245602
> Driver for Uber and Lyft live-streamed hundreds of riders on Twitch without their consent*
> 
> ...


*Pay drivers more and they will have something to lose. At those rates, everything is fare game!!!!*



uberdriverfornow said:


> Technically he did nothing wrong or illegal.


What cheap ass pax expect?


----------



## Trump Economics (Jul 29, 2015)

KD_LA said:


> As someone who just binge-watched the latest season of _Better Call Saul_... I'm freaking out over this bigly: I don't get to follow the adventures of JustSmurf anymore!
> View attachment 246562
> 
> (Fine print: I do not condone what he did, I do have dashcams in my car for safety/protection, and I do have dashcam warning signs)
> ...


----------



## Trafficat (Dec 19, 2016)

JimKE said:


> In addition, he is trying to get hired as a police officer (been seeking a job for a year). This certainly is not going to help him; it would disqualify him with many agencies.


If what he did was not illegal why would it disqualify him from being a cop?

Police dashcam videos are published all the time without consent from those who are stopped.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

Trafficat said:


> If what he did was not illegal why would it disqualify him from being a cop?
> 
> Police dashcam videos are published all the time without consent from those who are stopped.


He showed ignorance in exposing confidential information.


----------



## sellkatsell44 (Oct 25, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> He is not being paid to Host Amateur Reality Hour.
> 
> Uber needs to ban him.
> 
> Riders dont need this.


I would be the most boring rider.


----------



## METRO3 (Sep 3, 2017)

njn said:


> In fairness, he did have consent by posting a notice sticker.


Wow where does it say he was live streaming them? It's one thing ti record them it's another to broadcast them to the world


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

If Uber did a better job at vetting pax and not deactivating drivers for no reason and for any bs false claim from pax, drivers wouldn't need to record and live stream to cover their asses.


----------



## Broken Spoke (Mar 26, 2018)

KellyC said:


> Drivers don't either. Now pax will be suspicious of all cameras in Ubers.


That is exactly why I probably won't use one now.


----------



## DannyBrusco (Jul 2, 2018)

tohunt4me said:


> He is not being paid to Host Amateur Reality Hour.
> 
> Uber needs to ban him.
> 
> Riders dont need this.


So what about store with live streaming security cams?


----------



## jlong105 (Sep 15, 2017)

I wonder if his pax have basis for a lawsuit, since he used them to make money...


----------



## shmiff (Aug 5, 2017)

As much as I'm uncomfortable with the idea of live-streaming audio and video footage of rideshare passengers without their explicit consent, it's the law that is the problem here, not the actions of the driver.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

I think the real question is whether or not the passenger has a reasonable expectation of privacy, and since the passenger doesn't own the vehicle I would say no.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Nonya busy said:


> *Pay drivers more and they will have something to lose. At those rates, everything is fare game!!!!*
> 
> *Pay drivers more and they will have something to lose. At those rates, everything is fare game!!!!*
> 
> What cheap ass pax expect?


This driver is losing out big time. He's going to have legal fees to pay and he's going to struggle to find a career job.



nomad_driver said:


> I think the real question is whether or not the passenger has a reasonable expectation of privacy, and since the passenger doesn't own the vehicle I would say no.


When you get into a friend's car you expect them to be recording you?


----------



## Nonya busy (May 18, 2017)

Demon said:


> This driver is losing out big time. He's going to have legal fees to pay and he's going to struggle to find a career job.
> 
> When you get into a friend's car you expect them to be recording you?


Anyone I pay pennies to drive me somewhere isn't a friend.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

Nonya busy said:


> Anyone I pay pennies to drive me somewhere isn't a friend.


Not talking about paying for a ride.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Demon said:


> This driver is losing out big time. He's going to have legal fees to pay and he's going to struggle to find a career job.
> 
> When you get into a friend's car you expect them to be recording you?


This is a stoopid question.


----------



## The Gift of Fish (Mar 17, 2017)

Trump Economics said:


> *
> View attachment 245602
> Driver for Uber and Lyft live-streamed hundreds of riders on Twitch without their consent*
> 
> ...


I can't see a lot wrong with this. Imagine how well-behaved pax would be if they knew their antics were being streamed into people's homes.


----------



## Nonya busy (May 18, 2017)

The Gift of Fish said:


> I can't see a lot wrong with this. Imagine how well-behaved pax would be if they knew their antics were being streamed into people's homes.


also, drivers have to make end's meet somehow.


----------



## dauction (Sep 26, 2017)

njn said:


> In fairness, he did have consent by posting a notice sticker.


Seems like he was Missing the Placard that says .. He will POSTING VIDEOS of YOU (his passengers) on Youtube


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

nomad_driver said:


> This is a stoopid question.


Because we know the answer is no.


----------



## KMANDERSON (Jul 19, 2015)

tohunt4me said:


> He is not being paid to Host Amateur Reality Hour.
> 
> Uber needs to ban him.
> 
> Riders dont need this.


He should have at least told them and got there consent.Ryan is driving does that with every video he put on YouTube so there would be some that would be fine with it.


----------



## LyftNewbie10 (Apr 19, 2018)

This guy is a shameless a__hole, and makes hard-working people like us look bad.


----------



## pismire (May 2, 2017)

Cry about privacy, then use a smartphone that can tell way more about you than a clip in a 10 minute uber ride ever would. Makes perfect sense. Give Google, facebook, or Amazon all they wanna know but lets freak out over a harmless video.

Get over it, move on. The guy had a little fun. I wish I would have been able to ride his uber!

What a snowflake world we have become. No one thinks about anything, but they react to everything.


----------



## RaleighNick (Feb 18, 2017)

What I find funny about this thread is the people condemning this driver's actions as morally reprehensible, although not illegal, are some of the same names I notice who love to chime in on threads about the upfront pricing scam to exclaim: "you signed a contract! It's all legal! Nothing to see here!"

For these folks: now that you see how something can be immoral and not illegal, are you willing to condemn uber/lyft and their hyper extractive labor strategy? Just wondering.

On topic though, law probably needs to catch up to cover something like live streaming, this is clearly not a good thing.


----------



## henrygates (Mar 29, 2018)

I've had several pax ask me about this story. It's all over!


----------



## RegularUber (Jun 30, 2015)

I think it's an awesome idea if the passengers know about being on soc media like a live blog and agree to be on a stream. There is a channel on twitch called IRL but I could see how it could be a huge distraction to the driver if he responds to the stream. Twitch streamers usually give shout outs when they recieve a tip, that would be akward during a ride. Lol


----------



## Matty760 (Nov 9, 2015)

all these opinions are like assholes... everyone has one! I personally dont see the big deal. I tried using periscope while doing rides a couple years ago but the app interfered with the uber app at the time and made things glitch so I stopped doing it, plus the video could only be one way so I had it face outside the care instead like a drive cam. When you are not in your car or house or in a bathroom then you have no privacy elsewhere. When pax get in my car theres no privacy expected at all. my drive cam will pickup all audio and I live in CA. I do post a sign advising of a dash cam to be on the safe side but in reality when in my car its my rules and I have final say.


----------



## just_me (Feb 20, 2017)

Watched a few 'Uber riding' videos on Twitch from England. The driver looked a little distracted while driving in between rides with the people chatting to him. They would type, he would read, and then verbally respond while driving. And while the pax was in the car, he kept glancing over to read what people were typing to him, but didn't answer until the pax left. That's an added and unneeded distraction, imho. Yes, the paxs were aware that they were being streamed in these videos. One pax tried to find the stream while in the car. Didn't see anyone get out of the car after being informed.

Second, that driver never put both hands on the wheel. Not exactly the safest driver I've seen. But he's streaming himself.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Demon said:


> Because we know the answer is no.


No, it's a stoopid because its a stoopid question.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

nomad_driver said:


> No, it's a stoopid because its a stoopid question.


Right, because we know no reasonable person in their right mind would be expected to be recorded in a friend's car.



Matty760 said:


> all these opinions are like assholes... everyone has one! I personally dont see the big deal. I tried using periscope while doing rides a couple years ago but the app interfered with the uber app at the time and made things glitch so I stopped doing it, plus the video could only be one way so I had it face outside the care instead like a drive cam. When you are not in your car or house or in a bathroom then you have no privacy elsewhere. When pax get in my car theres no privacy expected at all. my drive cam will pickup all audio and I live in CA. I do post a sign advising of a dash cam to be on the safe side but in reality when in my car its my rules and I have final say.


It's a private car so privacy is expected, that's why you have the sign.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Demon said:


> Right, because we know no reasonable person in their right mind would be expected to be recorded in a friend's car.
> 
> It's a private car so privacy is expected, that's why you have the sign.


No, because between friends their is trust but between a uber driver and pax there is no trust.

It's not the rider's private car so no privacy can be expected.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

nomad_driver said:


> No, because between friends their is trust but between a uber driver and pax there is no trust.
> 
> It's not the rider's private car so no privacy can be expected.


Right, when you get in someone's personal car you don't expect to be recorded.

It's not the riders car when they get in their friend's car either.

You're driving your private vehicle and there is an expectation of privacy for the rider, that's what they're paying for.


----------



## just_me (Feb 20, 2017)

Jo3030 said:


> Weirdo purple lights were to be able to 'lighten up the car' without being too obvious.


Makes you wonder if a driver really needs to spend that extra money on a dash cam that sees well in the dark when using mood lighting allows the lesser expensive dash cams to see in the cab when it's dark out.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Demon said:


> Right, when you get in someone's personal car you don't expect to be recorded.
> 
> It's not the riders car when they get in their friend's car either.
> 
> You're driving your private vehicle and there is an expectation of privacy for the rider, that's what they're paying for.


They are paying for transportation not privacy. You want privacy drive yourself.


----------



## Norm22 (Feb 10, 2018)

Trafficat said:


> If what he did was not illegal why would it disqualify him from being a cop?
> 
> Police dashcam videos are published all the time without consent from those who are stopped.


No expectation of privacy on the street or in cop car,

Remember when?


----------



## 1971 (Jul 25, 2018)

nomad_driver said:


> They are paying for transportation not privacy. You want privacy drive yourself.


yup $500 off his live stream or 250 minimum rides duh

order a select or black they're legally paid, uber x or pool thou shall get what ye pays for.

if there werent laws id seriously install a hatch where every ride under $10 where im being robbed & stolen from, id hit a button that pushes the thief out of the moving vehicle to be ran over by whoevers behind me & keep on truckin but unfortunately i drop them off 1 star them, request never to share oxygen with their kind again, & go back to 9 outta 10 screened legal rides that i more than welcome

id also rather shove 2 tacos in a pax face at the end of the ride sans ubers payment my cancel rate would go from 20+% to zero just let me assault them with tacos & ill drive em for free.

same with acceptance rate its less than 10% ill get it to 100% dont pay me minimum fare just let me spit in the riders face after i drop em off


----------



## Kevin7889 (Dec 10, 2015)

Trump Economics said:


> *
> View attachment 245602
> Driver for Uber and Lyft live-streamed hundreds of riders on Twitch without their consent*
> 
> ...


IMO he did nothing wrong. Pax record us all the time and there's no telling if the pax put us up on twitch. We're independent contractors and we have the right to live stream our passengers if we want to! I hope uber and lyft get sued and this guy gets a truckload of money because by firing or suspending this driver violates the definition of independent contractor. It's not like he raped somebody or got violent with his passengers. He did nothing illegal and got fired/suspended. Hope he bankrupts uber and lyft


----------



## Nonya busy (May 18, 2017)

RaleighNick said:


> What I find funny about this thread is the people condemning this driver's actions as morally reprehensible, although not illegal, are some of the same names I notice who love to chime in on threads about the upfront pricing scam to exclaim: "you signed a contract! It's all legal! Nothing to see here!"
> 
> For these folks: now that you see how something can be immoral and not illegal, are you willing to condemn uber/lyft and their hyper extractive labor strategy? Just wondering.
> 
> On topic though, law probably needs to catch up to cover something like live streaming, this is clearly not a good thing.


undercover uber employees


----------



## Signal Twenty (Jun 26, 2017)

I think this a great idea. If more people and the media caught onto this, it will show how passengers can be idiots and outright jerks. It can show what BS Uber drivers have to put up with and how little they are paid to put up with it. 

As far as passenger privacy - F them. They are in my private car. There’s no real expectation of privacy in MY car. You car...sure. But my car no. My car is an extension of my domain, and the law (generally) recognizes this.


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

Demon said:


> You're driving your private vehicle and there is an expectation of privacy for the rider, that's what they're paying for.


Incorrect. They are paying for a ride with a STRANGER. Case in point, when I go to the airport, I use the line that says Commercial Vehicles, not private vehicles.

In my private vehicle, I can violate ADA and be racist and sexist and whatever. But when my vehicle is being used for business, it is no longer a private vehicle.



nomad_driver said:


> They are paying for transportation not privacy. You want privacy drive yourself.


Exactly.


----------



## Butterdog (Apr 12, 2018)

Demon said:


> It's a private car so privacy is expected, that's why you have the sign.


Indiana is a one party consent state. I don't need a sign and I don't need the riders consent. Sometimes I'll mention it when I want the riders to behave.


----------



## Homie G (Oct 19, 2017)

In addition said:


> it would disqualify him[/B] with many agencies.


Disqualify? I doubt it. His ride share experience should put him to the front of the line. This gig is just as dangerous as most law enforcement positions.


----------



## stpetej (Jul 3, 2017)

uberdriverfornow said:


> Technically he did nothing wrong or illegal.


True. But we all know that "not illegal" doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. When conflicted, I usually ask myself how I would like to be treated. Golden Rule stuff.


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

I would only post pics or vids without the customer consent if it was a "$50 reward for information leading to Le paxhole's arrest" poster.

I had a conversation with a passenger about this on the way to the airport this morning.

"Is this ride going to end up on the internet?"

"No audio and I can't access the video myself"

"Oh.. because it's not your car?"

"No one even watches it unless they are investigating a serious incident"

"Like what's considered serious?"

"Robbery, sexual assault, groping, theft, accusations of me doing lines of cocaine off the steering wheel... stuff like that"

Yeah... it happens, cameras need to be there. No reason to post stuff on the internet without a reason thou.










This is one of the ONLY customer pics I've EVER found from this cab company on the internet.

She didn't give consent to its use either.


----------



## Demon (Dec 6, 2014)

nomad_driver said:


> They are paying for transportation not privacy. You want privacy drive yourself.


If they didn't want privacy they'd be on a bus.


----------



## Tnasty (Mar 23, 2016)

Just think if that driver is robbed hes got plenty of witnesses.


----------



## Steve appleby (May 30, 2015)

the way I look at this is that yes it may be legal to do, but its morally wrong. people are going to do anything for money nowadays and will push the boundaries of what is morally right or wrong.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Steve appleby said:


> the way I look at this is that yes it may be legal to do, but its morally wrong. people are going to do anything for money nowadays and will push the boundaries of what is morally right or wrong.


Why is it morally wrong?


----------



## Steve appleby (May 30, 2015)

nomad_driver said:


> Why is it morally wrong?


you dont sit there and record people and THEN live stream it for everyone to see without their permission. to me its bad taste. I have 2 dashcams in my car, but they are outward looking and for safety reasons only. I can record footage but I would never live stream it without the passengers permission. that to me is just creepy and downright weird. theres a big difference between morality and legality. it may be legal to do, but its still frowned upon.


----------



## nomad_driver (May 11, 2016)

Steve appleby said:


> you dont sit there and record people and THEN live stream it for everyone to see without their permission. to me its bad taste. I have 2 dashcams in my car, but they are outward looking and for safety reasons only. I can record footage but I would never live stream it without the passengers permission. that to me is just creepy and downright weird. theres a big difference between morality and legality. it may be legal to do, but its still frowned upon.


You didn't answer my question, unless you mean to say that you don't like it therefore it is not moral.


----------



## Matty760 (Nov 9, 2015)

Stevie The magic Unicorn said:


> Yeah... it happens, cameras need to be there. No reason to post stuff on the internet without a reason thou.


Lol people post shit on snapchat and FB all the time for no reason... These pax post anytime they go outside or to dinner. I swear most of these pax are young millennials that just cant take a break from their phone anyways. They post the dumbest shit ever. So yea people do post on the internet without reason a lot!


----------



## _SEAM_ (Apr 11, 2018)

I feel this opinion in this colmun piece is a good way to look at this, "never assume have privacy anytime you're out in public." Especially in todays age where everything can be recorded.

But I still have my reservations on the whoe livestreaming issue of what the driver did. Recording for your personal records in case of any issues occur with the passenger in driver is a good thing. But livestreaming I don't feel there is any reason why a driver would need to livestream their cabin.

Article: Kim's Opinion: Uber and Lyft Drivers Livestream Passengers Without Their Consent (https://www.komando.com/columns/475...s-livestream-passengers-without-their-consent)


----------



## Rosalita (May 13, 2018)

Actually, no, "consent" to videotape me for a side hustle is not automatically given because I get into your car! I'm paying for a ride not for the driver's side hustle with Twitch (Twitch subscription fee). This guy is forcing the pax to cancel the ride, pay for that cancellation, request another driver, and be inconvenienced - or coerced into participation in his side job as Twitch Guy if they want to avoid all the extra cost and inconvenience.

Not only not cool; probably not legal in any court in the country.



Matty760 said:


> Lol people post shit on snapchat and FB all the time for no reason... These pax post anytime they go outside or to dinner. I swear most of these pax are young millennials that just cant take a break from their phone anyways. They post the dumbest shit ever. So yea people do post on the internet without reason a lot!


There is a huge difference between my posting myself on a social media platform and you posting videos of me on your social platforms without my knowledge or consent. Getting into your vehicle doesn't give you "consent" as I'm agreeing to a ride and to pay X for that ride. I'm not agreeing to be your side hustle when I order that ride. Forcing me to cancel the ride because I don't know what you'll be doing with the videotape is not part of the agreement with Uber or Lyft.


----------



## Rakos (Sep 2, 2014)

Rosalita said:


> Actually, no, "consent" to videotape me for a side hustle is not automatically given because I get into your car! I'm paying for a ride not for the driver's side hustle with Twitch (Twitch subscription fee). This guy is forcing the pax to cancel the ride, pay for that cancellation, request another driver, and be inconvenienced - or coerced into participation in his side job as Twitch Guy if they want to avoid all the extra cost and inconvenience.
> 
> Not only not cool; probably not legal in any court in the country.
> 
> There is a huge difference between my posting myself on a social media platform and you posting videos of me on your social platforms without my knowledge or consent. Getting into your vehicle doesn't give you "consent" as I'm agreeing to a ride and to pay X for that ride. I'm not agreeing to be your side hustle when I order that ride. Forcing me to cancel the ride because I don't know what you'll be doing with the videotape is not part of the agreement with Uber or Lyft.


THIS is why I do not record...

What happens in my auto....8>)

To me this space is sacred...8>O

I DO have a foward facing dashcam...

And if someone gets too carried away...

It CAN be rotated to record if needed...

Butt...in 4 years never have I needed...

To record inside....8>)

I'm much more interested in traffic...

The recording in front has saved me...

On more than one occasion...

If you are concerned make it clear...

Before you start the ride...8>)

That said...I don't blame any driver...

For feeling the need to protect themselves....8>)

Rakos


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

Rosalita said:


> I'm not agreeing to be your side hustle when I order that ride.


 actually you are, just not the side hustle you anticipated, lol


----------



## Bpr2 (Feb 21, 2017)

Rosalita said:


> Actually, no, "consent" to videotape me for a side hustle is not automatically given because I get into your car! I'm paying for a ride not for the driver's side hustle with Twitch (Twitch subscription fee). This guy is forcing the pax to cancel the ride, pay for that cancellation, request another driver, and be inconvenienced - or coerced into participation in his side job as Twitch Guy if they want to avoid all the extra cost and inconvenience.
> 
> Not only not cool; probably not legal in any court in the country.
> 
> There is a huge difference between my posting myself on a social media platform and you posting videos of me on your social platforms without my knowledge or consent. Getting into your vehicle doesn't give you "consent" as I'm agreeing to a ride and to pay X for that ride. I'm not agreeing to be your side hustle when I order that ride. Forcing me to cancel the ride because I don't know what you'll be doing with the videotape is not part of the agreement with Uber or Lyft.


Silent consent is given Upon entrance when there are signs posted and you know before you get into the car. Since you KNOW you're giving your consent. O need to sign any paperwork either since video isn't going to be used commercially.

If you don't want to be recorded and there are signs, tell the driver and it's up to them if they want you in their car or not.

Cams get turned off for no reason what so ever.


----------



## RideShareJUNKIE (Jun 23, 2017)

OMG he was streaming live!!!  Thats crazy right?

Everyones MUG is somewhere on the internet at some point. Good for him, if he was making decent $$$. 
I have to ask if people have forgotten who we contract for? Is what this guy doing to his pax, worse than what the rideshare companies do with us on the daily? 
So who is the real hustla here? 
I see how its weird, deceptive, frowned upon, etc, but im not surprised, outraged, bothered. Kind of funny actually. If im acting like an idiot and it was caught on camera, then i can only be mad at myself for the core problem; being a idiot to begin with. 
The only time I truly expect privacy: A bathroom, fitting room and a bedroom. F it put me on the internet without me knowing. As long as im not naked, im fine. Thats plenty of privacy for this day and age.


----------



## Bart McCoy (Nov 4, 2014)

It doesn't matter what state you are in, if there's no reasonable expectation of privacy, you can record. Just like we have right to record police. His private car, he can do what he wants. He would never get convicted on this. My only gripe is why he paid $3,000 for some dag on cameras


----------



## whiskeyboat (Oct 14, 2017)

who the hell wants to watch livestream of somebody taking an uber?


----------

