Doordash calls Uber’s lawsuit accusing its anti-competitive practice of “intimidation tactics”
Doordash asked the court to dismiss Uber’s lawsuit filed in February, calling it “worthy” and “cynical and computational intimidation tactics.” Uber sued the largest food delivery provider in the United States earlier this year, accusing it of putting pressure on restaurants to use its services specifically. At the time, Uber said it heard Doordash charges from “restaurants across the country”, and the company also charged higher commission rates from restaurants that also sell their food on Uber Eats. It also accuses Doordash of threats to downgrade restaurants on its list if they are also available on the Uber Eats app. But in the motion for dismissal, Doordash said Uber’s lawsuit is not about protecting competition, but about avoiding competition.
Food delivery providers assert that Uber “cannot provide the high-quality services it provides to merchants, consumers and couriers” and therefore, Uber “requests to claim unfounded legal claims” rather than competing based on its own merits. It wrote in the motion that Uber’s complaints were “rooted in misleading concepts” that it had to change its business practices (that considered competitive business practices) in order to give way to Uber’s business. However, the company explained that the law “focuses on the protection of competition, not the competitors.”
Meanwhile, Uber told TechCrunch Doordash is “hard to understand” its complaints. “When restaurants are forced to choose between unfair terms or retaliation, it’s not competition — it’s coercion,” its spokesman said. The San Francisco County Superior Court, California, plans to hear Uber’s lawsuit on July 11.
