9 ms·

Uber rape victim sues Uber, says execs got her medical records

126 points by fabian2k 9y ago

djsumdog 9y ago
I guess India doesn't have HIPPA style regulations (or if they do, they're just unenforced). I haven't been there in decades, but I remember having to take x-rays and blood test results between doctors. There was no real centralized health system at the time. So the crime, sharing personal health records, occurred in India. But it was an American victim, American company and American employees allegedly getting and sharing her health information. I'm interested in how this plays out legally.
- metalliqaz 9y ago
  I think it must be true that HIPAA doesn't apply to the Indian records, because otherwise I'm sure there would be a HIPAA complaint. Usually that would start against the professionals in the medical field that mishandled the records. Instead, this suit is about invasion of privacy and defamation. Honestly I'm surprised that she can go after them for defamation after already accepting a settlement from them. Still, these guys are obviously first-class assholes and at this point I'm not surprised anymore. Uber seems destined for the textbooks, under "how to kill a unicorn."
  - gordon_freeman 9y ago
    just settling a rape case does not give Uber execs the freedom to pass the private health records within the company and defame that woman so she is still entitled to file the defamation case. I'm surprised that you're surprised.
    - dsfyu404ed 9y ago
      > pass the private health records within the company and defame that woman Where did you get that impression the closet I could find in the article was >speculating that Plaintiff had made up the brutal rape in collusion with a rival of Uber in India to undermine Uber's business I'm no fan of uber but the allegations made by the plaintiff do not even amount to your description of them
- atonse 9y ago
  The existence of HIPAA has little to do with whether you have to take your records across doctors. HIPAA requires that our medical data is secured when stored at a medical facility, but I still have to drive over with CDs and printed X rays if I have to go to different doctors and specialists. Doctor's referrals are still paper printouts, and you have to show up early to any doctor as a new patient, and fill out the same form about your medical history all over again. Things are still faxed, sometimes emailed. This problem is still completely unsolved in the US. The closest thing is maybe if you're going across doctors in one hospital or hospital network, then your records are electronically "transferred"
  - ars 9y ago
    > The existence of HIPAA has little to do with whether you have to take your records across doctors. Well, actually HIPAA stands for "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act" - it's specifically about making health records portable. The security provisions were it's more minor, yet, best know part.
    - atonse 9y ago
      Interesting. Yet we see basically zero portability. So what happened?
    - dragonwriter 9y ago
      > Well, actually HIPAA stands for "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act" - it's specifically about making health records portable. No, it's about making health insurance portable. [0] (The Security and Privacy pieces—as well as the IT standards bits—are part of the one “accountability” piece of the title, and largely irrelevant to the “portability” piece.) Health records, in terms of interoperability, weren't a big focus in the legislation (they became a bigger focus with meaningful use and related rules in the ACA.) EDIT: to be fair, though, access to your own records is also part of the accountability part, which isn't exactly portability of records, but it's related. [0] See, e.g , http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/portability.asp http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/portability.asp
  - 9y ago
- JohnTHaller 9y ago
  There's mostly no centralized system in the US here either. I had to get an MRI on a burned CDR from my old doctor's office and walk it over to my new doctor's office three weeks ago here in NYC. None of my doctors share records with each other except when they're in the same hospital's network. And even then it can be iffy.
- __jal 9y ago
  Unless I'm missing something, I don't see how HIPPA would have anything to do with this. It only applies to "covered entities", so had the initial disclosure happened in the US, the leaker most likely would have been implicated, but HIPPA would not apply to Uber people (unless, for some reason, Uber is a covered entity). Defamation, sure.
- cryptozeus 9y ago
  Any style of regulation is non existent
WisNorCan 9y ago
The penalties associated with white collar crime are not effective deterrents. If you have billions of dollars and the worst that can happen is that you pay a couple million in fines, then you are effectively above the law. This was evident in the subprime mortgage crisis. Vast communities were destroyed with limited consequences for the perpetrators. I would personally like to see white collar crime lead to incarceration more often as that seems like a stronger deterrent. Having said that, I am not deeply knowledgeable about the facts of this particular case.
- redm 9y ago
  I see what you're saying, the consequences don't outway the benefit of breaking the law; Congress can solve that through tougher penalties. That said, I feel confident the answer is not putting MORE people in Prison, especially for civil cases. The US already incarcerates far too many people. It's out of control as it is. [1] [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_ra... [2] "Comparing some countries with similar percentages of immigrants, Germany has an incarceration rate of 76 per 100,000 population (as of 2014),[25] Italy is 85 per 100,000 (as of 2015),[26] and Saudi Arabia is 161 per 100,000 (as of 2013).[27] Comparing other countries with a zero tolerance policy for illegal drugs, the rate of Russia is 455 per 100,000 (as of 2015),[28] Kazakhstan is 275 per 100,000 (as of 2015),[29] Singapore is 220 per 100,000 (as of 2014),[30] and Sweden is 60 per 100,000 (as of 2014).[31]"
  - busterarm 9y ago
    If we applied the same laws around not profiting off of violent crimes to white collar crime AND extended that to company stakeholders as well, investors would make executives knock off that sort of behavior real quick.
    - redm 9y ago
      Are you suggesting that invasion of privacy become a criminal offense? Effectively, that's what happened here, and even though its Uber, its individuals who did it. Your neighbor could do it to you as well. This seems like a slippery slope of criminalizing far too much. For example, maybe Nick Denton should have gone to jail for invasion of privacy against Hulk Hogan? I don't agree with that either.
tareqak 9y ago
Previous submissions: 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14562331 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14562331 (was flagged) 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14563285 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14563285 3. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14562862 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14562862 Other sources: 1. The New York Times: Uber Is Sued by Woman Who Was Raped by One of Its Drivers in India from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/technology/uber-india-rape-lawsuit.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/technology/uber-india-rap... 2. Bloomberg: Uber Accused of `Rape Denialism' by Victim of India Assault from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-15/uber-sued-by-india-rape-victim-over-alleged-privacy-violation https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-15/uber-sued... 3. CNBC: Rape victim files new lawsuit against Uber from http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/15/rape-victim-files-new-lawsuit-against-uber.html http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/15/rape-victim-files-new-lawsuit... Edited to correct formatting.
outside1234 9y ago
I think the only shoe left to drop for Uber is the great convergence where Donald Trump takes over as CEO.
- jquery 9y ago
  Trump's Law - any sufficiently long discussion thread will involve a shoehorned reference to our current President no matter how tenuous or even non-existent.
michaelbuckbee 9y ago
There's nothing in the article - but had Uber said anything as to why they wanted the records? Or why on earth the CEO of the company needed to see them? Deeply repugnant.
- kevindqc 9y ago
  >The complaint goes on to allege that Alexander shared the records with Kalanick and Emil Michael, an Uber executive who was fired earlier this week. According to the complaint, the men "discussed the records among themselves and with other staff at Uber, speculating that Plaintiff had made up the brutal rape in collusion with a rival of Uber in India to undermine Uber's business."
- vmchale 9y ago
  I doubt they would admit anything of that nature. And yeah, I don't understand why the CEO of the company would think this would help their PR. Even if it was a secret.
- fav_collector 9y ago
  IIRC, Uber was being sued by the Indian government over the case. Information is power
- lsiebert 9y ago
  If I had to guess, they probably had it as part of the legal process for the first lawsuit, submitted as an affidavit or evidence to the court or something. Repugnant indeed.
cosinetau 9y ago
This is getting old, folks. https://help.uber.com/h/24010fe7-7a67-4ee5-9938-c734000b144a https://help.uber.com/h/24010fe7-7a67-4ee5-9938-c734000b144a
- kafkaesq 9y ago
  This is getting old, folks. Not to the victim it ain't.
  - cosinetau 9y ago
    I never meant to imply that was the case. As a person that hasn't been harmed by this company, I see this problem as having gotten out of hand and in need of intervention. As someone who has been harmed by other people, I find it troubling that some folks still continue to utilize a product that is actively causing harm to others, and violating their rights. The fact is that given the heap of problems seemingly continuously coming out of Uber, the company doesn't seem to be changing, and these problems aren't slowing down. Uber needs to change practice, and we need to communicate to the market that this behavior isn't acceptable via our wallets; they don't really seem to understand any other message. If it means that this company ultimately folds under the weight of these problems, so be it. The message needs to be clear to others: this is NOT acceptable.
- Cuntaholic 9y ago
  How about you fuck off?
MichaelBurge 9y ago
It seems like the lawsuit should be thrown out for two reasons: * They already settled the lawsuit. At the very least, Doe should forfeit the money she already received before beginning this lawsuit regarding substantially the same matter. Otherwise, what's the point of settling if you can't forget about it? * The onus for keeping medical records private is usually on the medical provider, not on the people interested in obtaining them.
- s73ver 9y ago
  "They already settled the lawsuit." This is a separate lawsuit. This is about them illegally obtaining her medical records. "At the very least, Doe should forfeit the money she already received before beginning this lawsuit regarding substantially the same matter. " No. This is a separate action. "Otherwise, what's the point of settling if you can't forget about the matter?" Settling does not give you carte blanche to keep being shitty. "The onus for keeping medical records private is usually on the medical provider, not on the people interested in obtaining them." How does this excuse Uber's behavior in the slightest?
- hemantv 9y ago
  Do you have no decency left?
tareqak 9y ago
In case someone is interested in how this story did on the front page: http://hnrankings.info/14564112/ http://hnrankings.info/14564112/ .

126 points by fabian2k 9y ago

I guess India doesn't have HIPPA style regulations (or if they do, they're just unenforced). I haven't been there in decades, but I remember having to take x-rays and blood test results between doctors. There was no real centralized health system at the time. So the crime, sharing personal health records, occurred in India. But it was an American victim, American company and American employees allegedly getting and sharing her health information. I'm interested in how this plays out legally.

metalliqaz 9y ago
I think it must be true that HIPAA doesn't apply to the Indian records, because otherwise I'm sure there would be a HIPAA complaint. Usually that would start against the professionals in the medical field that mishandled the records. Instead, this suit is about invasion of privacy and defamation. Honestly I'm surprised that she can go after them for defamation after already accepting a settlement from them. Still, these guys are obviously first-class assholes and at this point I'm not surprised anymore. Uber seems destined for the textbooks, under "how to kill a unicorn."
- gordon_freeman 9y ago
  just settling a rape case does not give Uber execs the freedom to pass the private health records within the company and defame that woman so she is still entitled to file the defamation case. I'm surprised that you're surprised.
  - dsfyu404ed 9y ago
    > pass the private health records within the company and defame that woman Where did you get that impression the closet I could find in the article was >speculating that Plaintiff had made up the brutal rape in collusion with a rival of Uber in India to undermine Uber's business I'm no fan of uber but the allegations made by the plaintiff do not even amount to your description of them
atonse 9y ago
The existence of HIPAA has little to do with whether you have to take your records across doctors. HIPAA requires that our medical data is secured when stored at a medical facility, but I still have to drive over with CDs and printed X rays if I have to go to different doctors and specialists. Doctor's referrals are still paper printouts, and you have to show up early to any doctor as a new patient, and fill out the same form about your medical history all over again. Things are still faxed, sometimes emailed. This problem is still completely unsolved in the US. The closest thing is maybe if you're going across doctors in one hospital or hospital network, then your records are electronically "transferred"
- ars 9y ago
  > The existence of HIPAA has little to do with whether you have to take your records across doctors. Well, actually HIPAA stands for "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act" - it's specifically about making health records portable. The security provisions were it's more minor, yet, best know part.
  - atonse 9y ago
    Interesting. Yet we see basically zero portability. So what happened?
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Well, actually HIPAA stands for "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act" - it's specifically about making health records portable. No, it's about making health insurance portable. [0] (The Security and Privacy pieces—as well as the IT standards bits—are part of the one “accountability” piece of the title, and largely irrelevant to the “portability” piece.) Health records, in terms of interoperability, weren't a big focus in the legislation (they became a bigger focus with meaningful use and related rules in the ACA.) EDIT: to be fair, though, access to your own records is also part of the accountability part, which isn't exactly portability of records, but it's related. [0] See, e.g , http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/portability.asp http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/portability.asp
- 9y ago
JohnTHaller 9y ago
There's mostly no centralized system in the US here either. I had to get an MRI on a burned CDR from my old doctor's office and walk it over to my new doctor's office three weeks ago here in NYC. None of my doctors share records with each other except when they're in the same hospital's network. And even then it can be iffy.
__jal 9y ago
Unless I'm missing something, I don't see how HIPPA would have anything to do with this. It only applies to "covered entities", so had the initial disclosure happened in the US, the leaker most likely would have been implicated, but HIPPA would not apply to Uber people (unless, for some reason, Uber is a covered entity). Defamation, sure.
cryptozeus 9y ago
Any style of regulation is non existent

WisNorCan 9y ago

The penalties associated with white collar crime are not effective deterrents. If you have billions of dollars and the worst that can happen is that you pay a couple million in fines, then you are effectively above the law. This was evident in the subprime mortgage crisis. Vast communities were destroyed with limited consequences for the perpetrators. I would personally like to see white collar crime lead to incarceration more often as that seems like a stronger deterrent. Having said that, I am not deeply knowledgeable about the facts of this particular case.

redm 9y ago
I see what you're saying, the consequences don't outway the benefit of breaking the law; Congress can solve that through tougher penalties. That said, I feel confident the answer is not putting MORE people in Prison, especially for civil cases. The US already incarcerates far too many people. It's out of control as it is. [1] [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_ra... [2] "Comparing some countries with similar percentages of immigrants, Germany has an incarceration rate of 76 per 100,000 population (as of 2014),[25] Italy is 85 per 100,000 (as of 2015),[26] and Saudi Arabia is 161 per 100,000 (as of 2013).[27] Comparing other countries with a zero tolerance policy for illegal drugs, the rate of Russia is 455 per 100,000 (as of 2015),[28] Kazakhstan is 275 per 100,000 (as of 2015),[29] Singapore is 220 per 100,000 (as of 2014),[30] and Sweden is 60 per 100,000 (as of 2014).[31]"
- busterarm 9y ago
  If we applied the same laws around not profiting off of violent crimes to white collar crime AND extended that to company stakeholders as well, investors would make executives knock off that sort of behavior real quick.
  - redm 9y ago
    Are you suggesting that invasion of privacy become a criminal offense? Effectively, that's what happened here, and even though its Uber, its individuals who did it. Your neighbor could do it to you as well. This seems like a slippery slope of criminalizing far too much. For example, maybe Nick Denton should have gone to jail for invasion of privacy against Hulk Hogan? I don't agree with that either.

tareqak 9y ago

Previous submissions: 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14562331 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14562331 (was flagged) 2. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14563285 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14563285 3. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14562862 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14562862 Other sources: 1. The New York Times: Uber Is Sued by Woman Who Was Raped by One of Its Drivers in India from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/technology/uber-india-rape-lawsuit.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/technology/uber-india-rap... 2. Bloomberg: Uber Accused of `Rape Denialism' by Victim of India Assault from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-15/uber-sued-by-india-rape-victim-over-alleged-privacy-violation https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-15/uber-sued... 3. CNBC: Rape victim files new lawsuit against Uber from http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/15/rape-victim-files-new-lawsuit-against-uber.html http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/15/rape-victim-files-new-lawsuit... Edited to correct formatting.

outside1234 9y ago

I think the only shoe left to drop for Uber is the great convergence where Donald Trump takes over as CEO.

jquery 9y ago
Trump's Law - any sufficiently long discussion thread will involve a shoehorned reference to our current President no matter how tenuous or even non-existent.

michaelbuckbee 9y ago

There's nothing in the article - but had Uber said anything as to why they wanted the records? Or why on earth the CEO of the company needed to see them? Deeply repugnant.

kevindqc 9y ago
>The complaint goes on to allege that Alexander shared the records with Kalanick and Emil Michael, an Uber executive who was fired earlier this week. According to the complaint, the men "discussed the records among themselves and with other staff at Uber, speculating that Plaintiff had made up the brutal rape in collusion with a rival of Uber in India to undermine Uber's business."
vmchale 9y ago
I doubt they would admit anything of that nature. And yeah, I don't understand why the CEO of the company would think this would help their PR. Even if it was a secret.
fav_collector 9y ago
IIRC, Uber was being sued by the Indian government over the case. Information is power
lsiebert 9y ago
If I had to guess, they probably had it as part of the legal process for the first lawsuit, submitted as an affidavit or evidence to the court or something. Repugnant indeed.

cosinetau 9y ago

This is getting old, folks. https://help.uber.com/h/24010fe7-7a67-4ee5-9938-c734000b144a https://help.uber.com/h/24010fe7-7a67-4ee5-9938-c734000b144a

kafkaesq 9y ago
This is getting old, folks. Not to the victim it ain't.
- cosinetau 9y ago
  I never meant to imply that was the case. As a person that hasn't been harmed by this company, I see this problem as having gotten out of hand and in need of intervention. As someone who has been harmed by other people, I find it troubling that some folks still continue to utilize a product that is actively causing harm to others, and violating their rights. The fact is that given the heap of problems seemingly continuously coming out of Uber, the company doesn't seem to be changing, and these problems aren't slowing down. Uber needs to change practice, and we need to communicate to the market that this behavior isn't acceptable via our wallets; they don't really seem to understand any other message. If it means that this company ultimately folds under the weight of these problems, so be it. The message needs to be clear to others: this is NOT acceptable.
Cuntaholic 9y ago
How about you fuck off?

MichaelBurge 9y ago

It seems like the lawsuit should be thrown out for two reasons: * They already settled the lawsuit. At the very least, Doe should forfeit the money she already received before beginning this lawsuit regarding substantially the same matter. Otherwise, what's the point of settling if you can't forget about it? * The onus for keeping medical records private is usually on the medical provider, not on the people interested in obtaining them.

s73ver 9y ago
"They already settled the lawsuit." This is a separate lawsuit. This is about them illegally obtaining her medical records. "At the very least, Doe should forfeit the money she already received before beginning this lawsuit regarding substantially the same matter. " No. This is a separate action. "Otherwise, what's the point of settling if you can't forget about the matter?" Settling does not give you carte blanche to keep being shitty. "The onus for keeping medical records private is usually on the medical provider, not on the people interested in obtaining them." How does this excuse Uber's behavior in the slightest?
hemantv 9y ago
Do you have no decency left?

tareqak 9y ago

In case someone is interested in how this story did on the front page: http://hnrankings.info/14564112/ http://hnrankings.info/14564112/ .