The case challenged the business model of Uber’s main consumer service, UberX, which the plaintiffs portrayed as regulatory gamesmanship. The company markets itself as a cheaper alternative to taxis, but the way it undersells them is by ignoring safety, consumer protection, and nondiscrimination rules, the suit claimed. It alleged violations of federal antitrust laws and Massachusetts’s unfair competition statute, known as Chapter 93A.
Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton of the U.S. District Court for the ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.