Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sonos' Privacy Policy Change Suggests It Might Sell Your Data
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This makes me very glad I never bought into Sonos. There is absolutely no reason for a speaker to need an app other than to hoover up data.
My Sony headset app was promptly deleted as it didn’t offer anything I cared about and was obviously there to collect data.
My Sony headset app was promptly deleted as it didn’t offer anything I cared about and was obviously there to collect data.
Did private equity buy this or something? There doesn't seem to be anyone who cares running the business.
Congrats to all that are in favor of alt-stores. Once they are legislated into existence privacy scorecards will cease to exist and our data will be hoovered up at a much larger pace than it is today!
Point being, Sonos could pull their app and make it available from only their web site and then you will have no privacy scorecard, only 20 pages of legal-ese in the form of the TOS to determine how you are being pimped out.
Point being, Sonos could pull their app and make it available from only their web site and then you will have no privacy scorecard, only 20 pages of legal-ese in the form of the TOS to determine how you are being pimped out.
Last edited:
As someone who has their speakers, I would say they are overpriced. I do currently enjoy using them. But I wouldn't buy one now today if I never had their speakers.
There’s a thread about this on the Sonos forums. Add your voice:
Popular audio company Sonos recently updated its U.S. privacy policy to make a small but notable change that seemingly puts customer data at risk. As noted by Louis Rossmann (via The Verge), the new Sonos privacy policy removes a line about not selling customer data.
In the 2023 version of its privacy policy, Sonos had this sentence: "We do not and will not sell your personal data to third parties." The statement has been removed from the 2024 version of the privacy policy in the United States, though it is still present in privacy policies in other countries.
The change to the privacy policy has sparked commentary on Reddit from Sonos customers who have become increasingly unhappy with the company in recent months. Back in May, Sonos rolled out a new app design that has been widely criticized for missing a long list of features like editing a song queue, managing playlists, shuffling a music library, and more.
Sonos users already unhappy with the app changes feel that the privacy policy update is another nail in the coffin for Sonos. From Reddit user RemarkableAgent1350:
The removal of that line from the privacy policy doesn't mean Sonos is definitely selling customer data, and the company has not responded queries about what the change means as of yet.
Article Link: Sonos' Privacy Policy Change Suggests It Might Sell Your Data
Sonos 2024 privacy policy change; Sonos can now sell your personal data | Sonos Community
Sonos: why did you change the 2023 version of the privacy policy in 2024 and remove the sentence: "We do not and will not sell your personal data to third parties." The statement has been removed from the 2024 version of the privacy policy in the United States, though it is still present in...
en.community.sonos.com
No surprise.
I threw out >$2500 of Sonos gear a few years ago. Could not get $50 for it. Substandard audio quality. Constant 'updates' ensure it's totally unreliable. They depreciate features, treat customers with contempt. Good riddance.
I threw out >$2500 of Sonos gear a few years ago. Could not get $50 for it. Substandard audio quality. Constant 'updates' ensure it's totally unreliable. They depreciate features, treat customers with contempt. Good riddance.
The “privacy scorecard” is entirely self disclosed - all Sonos (or anyone else) has to do is… lie.
Never claimed it was perfect but at least it is an attempt. IIRC there are penalties if you are found to be lying but this is not my area of expertise.
Pretty nefarious if they have been saving the data all this time just in case they may want to sell it in the future.
Saddened every time I read another story about Sonos. I still have a ZonePlayer S5 that works great and has other ZonePlayer kit. It always worked so well and audiophiles loved them, ease of use and the quality.
Then Sonos seemed to have some kind of Boeing moment, imploding quality and contempt for customers, bricking their kit without informing anyone and just becoming a nasty company. I would never consider buying anything Sonos again.
Then Sonos seemed to have some kind of Boeing moment, imploding quality and contempt for customers, bricking their kit without informing anyone and just becoming a nasty company. I would never consider buying anything Sonos again.
I didn’t mean or expect free music. My point was they are putting features such as skip track behind a paywall.
If I bought an iPod back in the day I’d expect a play button to come with it.
But putting features behind a paywall means that there is free music.
Your iPod analogy doesn't work, because you bought it — with money. The equivalent would be "I pay for Spotify Premium and I can't skip a track" but that's not what's happening.
We have access to free music, and the tradeoff is a degree of inconvenience i.e. not being able to skip tracks, listening to adverts etc. This isn't unreasonable. Even the paid plans are vastly underpriced. Music has become a commodity and sadly that's led to a serious under appreciation for the time and money that goes into creating it, especially if the artists are also hiring a studio and producers and graphic designers and marketing people. The streaming model does not give anywhere close to appropriate compensation.
But that's a slight tangent, I suppose. The main point is, there is an expectation of free music. If there wasn't, there would be no complaints about paywalled features because every user would be paying anyway. Spotify and co want the free versions to be inferior, so people upgrade.
The music is 100% free. We can even make playlists and collaborate with friends on those playlists. And if we want more, we pay the whopping price of, erm, less than a single CD each month. Seriously, you couldn't buy a cinema ticket and a Coke from that cinema for less than a full month of Apple Music.
And it's not just "free music" we're talking about. It's "having pretty much every song ever recorded in all of musical history, in our pockets and our Watches, at all times, for free." It's an absurdly privileged position. Imagine going back to 1995 and telling a kid with a Walkman what we have today and they wouldn't believe it — let alone that it's available for free. And they'd wet themselves laughing if we then said "people complain that they have to pay a tenner to skip averts."
The music that I PAID for (buying albums for example) is limited so it was NOT free.
The subscription also costs so is also not free. I am not talking about free music. You are missing my point.
Am I missing your point or have you not made your point clear? Because your original post that was quoted spoke about features being put behind a paywall.
What is your point about paid subscription music - is Spotify preventing the skipping of tracks on paid plans?