Spotify Just Got Real Creepy with the Data It Collects on You

http://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2015/08/20/spotify-creepy-privacy-policy/

by Phoenix26 • 11 years ago

60 61 11 years ago

jamesblonde3• 11 years ago

Apple are just getting dirty in the music business now. They're telling their favorite journalists about Spotify's new privacy policy - like a journalist would ever investigate such a thing!

Someone• 11 years ago

"Upon opening the Spotify app up this morning, your reporter was greeted with a request to agree to the new conditions."

So Apple hacked the Spotify app to pop up a message announcing the new privacy policy? On iOS, Android, or both? Either way, that's quite an extraordinary claim.

I find the idea that Spotify made the change itself and that tech journalists routinely check for changes in privacy policies searching for something to write about much more plausible.

So, please give some evidence that this is what happened.

richmarr2• 11 years ago

So Apple hacked...

Think you misunderstood that aspect of jamesblonde's comment. He's suggesting the journalist is pushing Apple's PR for them. It does happen, journalists often use content PR firms send them. I have no idea if it happened in this case.

jagermo2• 11 years ago

Not really. Brews is covering topics like privacy, so the updated policy and the additional permissions might have peeked his interest. http://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/

jalfresi4• 11 years ago

Is this for real? I pay £10 a month to avoid this crap and now I'm lumped in as well?

Screw this, I'm off to Apple Music.

philliphaydon• 11 years ago

I moved to deezer. Waiting for android support for apple music. Spotify are gone for me when they ruined their desktop app.

charlesray8• 11 years ago

You're complaining about Spotify's desktop app and yet you'd rather use iTunes? That's rich.

richmarr2• 11 years ago

android support for apple music

Is that a thing? I thought Apple Music existed only to push iDevices.

charlesray8• 11 years ago

"I pay £10 a month to avoid this crap"

I don't understand this concept. I pay $10 a month get rid of ads, to be able to use the mobile app, and to get higher quality streams. There was never any reason to believe being a paid member had any impact on the data Spotify collects from you.

jalfresi4• 11 years ago

It appears that the privacy policy makes several references to advertising. I pay money so I don't receive any advertising, so Spotify make no money from me that way.

The part that concerns me is that my data can now be sold to someone else, with ever more excruciating detail about me. Thats the part that concerns me; I don't have an arrangement with those third parties.

thomasrossi2• 11 years ago

I notice two things: 1) why shouldn't Apple collect the very same data? 2) apparently users are willing to pay for privacy, that's pretty cool! Something like vysk will actually have some space.

gcr• 11 years ago

Why? Apple built your telephone; they already know about your "contacts, photos, or media files." They know your GPS location, too.

This reminds me of the quip about conservative folks threatening to move to Canada because they're unhappy about all the corrupting liberal values creeping into American politics.

jalfresi4• 11 years ago

I am under no illusions that Apple keeps this information. I've opted out of iAds so I know that my data is not being used against me, and Apple do not sell my data to third-parties.

To be clear, Spotify using my habits and data to improve their service I have no problem with; it makes a better service for me! Same with Apple.

Maybe I should have explained clearer in my original comment (though I thought it was obvious) but I have no problem dealing with companies that I deal with; it's companies I DONT have an arrangement with who I have trouble trusting they wont use my data against me.

And now it appears that Spotify is one of those companies. And all I want to do is stream my playlists on the way to work. Now I have to consider that they may be selling my contacts lists, movements, etc;

It's a plain cash grab at my expense. And I wont do business with businesses that don't respect me or my data.

marrs• 11 years ago

Maybe that's part of the incentive. If Apple already have your data then you can't give it them twice. Better to limit the number of companies with access to your data to 1 by using the same company for everything.

This isn't a line of reasoning that appeals to me but I can see how you might want to go this route if you've already compromised on security and privacy to get a shiny new iPhone.

merijnv2• 11 years ago

To be fair, I opened the privacy policy from Spotify just now (I think I updated to a newer version yesterday?) and I don't see any of these things mentioned in the privacy policy, so might wanna hold your horses.

imglorp2• 11 years ago

Or, use the money to buy albums (the old fashioned way) and put them on your device or dropbox or whatever. Then you don't spray your private information around the galaxy.

joopxiv3• 11 years ago

"Upon opening the Spotify app up this morning..."

"FORBES contacted Spotify for a response and is awaiting comment."

This tells you exactly how much time they waited for Spotify to respond. This is 'iterative journalism' at its worst: publish first, investigate later! Completely disgusting.

beyti• 11 years ago

If the article is created based on the update from the privacy policy, the last sentence only means that they're just awaiting response from spotify if they'd like to say something.

They're not asking anything, just showing the updates to readers; and IMHO it's a nice kind of journalism for me.

jamesblonde3• 11 years ago

Apple wrote the article for them. Forbes edited it and published it. That's the real story here, IMO.

benihana• 11 years ago

Yeah you already said that elsewhere, also without any kind of proof or even a hint that it might be true.

dingaling2• 11 years ago

Why should Forbes wait for comment, when Spotify didn't wait for their users?

It's not as if this is something that took Spotify by surprise, like a data hack, that would require time to formulate a legally-sound response.

They will have been planning and implementing this change for months. They could have issued a press release two weeks ago advising their customers of the upcoming changes, but didn't.

Spotify seem to like surprises, so Forbes played one on them.

jimmytucson• 11 years ago

    > Why should Forbes wait for comment, when Spotify didn't wait for their users?

That's like asking "why shouldn't Forbes stab their users in the face when Spotify shits on their users chests?"

In other words, I don't think he's saying Forbes did Spotify dirty, rather Forbes did wrong by their readers by publishing a story without investigating it first.

joopxiv3• 11 years ago

Spotify does wait for the user's consent. That's the whole point of agreeing to the privacy policy. Apart from that, Spotify doesn't have anything to do with basic principles of journalism, because they are not journalists.

imglorp2• 11 years ago

While interesting, it doesn't really matter what they had to respond. The focus was on the policy change, which was fact checked by presenting the document. Some reports don't need two viewpoints, eg as opposed to the normal he said vs she said.

jagermo2• 11 years ago

I just wanted to note that forbes uses at least 16 trackers in this article (and does not tell you about it).

I have no problem with journalists pointing out flaws, but especially forbes likes to know a lot about its readers.

merijnv2• 11 years ago

FYI, I opened up the privacy policy from my Spotify install (I updated yesterday, I think?) and none of this is mentioned in it.

lowmagnet• 11 years ago

With the default uBlock and uMatrix rules I use, the article just shows a spinner. I have to enable forbesimg.com that loads article thumbnails and the main css, along with 'vendor' and 'scripts' js.

tempestn• 11 years ago

Sensor data could make sense to pick appropriate music based on activity. Perhaps the idea with the GPS is the same, although personally I'd still prefer not to share that.

Guyag2• 11 years ago

I believe this is the case - they have a mode (so I'm told) that will choose music based on your current running pace.

Guyag2• 11 years ago

Companies need to take a new approach to the permissions they request - especially on Android where these are explicitly shown to the user. Often there are innocuous purposes behind them, but it's rarely immediately clear and results in people jumping to conclusions. Companies should be more explicit as to the reasons they request permissions.

ProblemFactory• 11 years ago

The good news is that from Android 6.0, permissions will be more dynamic: https://developer.android.com/preview/features/runtime-permi...

Apps can ask for permissions only if/when they are actually needed for a niche feature, and the user can reject or revoke each permission individually.

ruuki• 11 years ago

in general, i really don't like still being a product although i'm paying for subscription.

Oletros• 11 years ago

When he talks about mobile app, does he talks about the iOS one?

i have opened the app on Android, gone to the privacy policies and I don't see any of those things he talks about. I have privacy policy in Spanish

danielsamuels2• 11 years ago

I had the new privacy policy appear when I opened the app this morning and had to accept it to continue. Probably just rolling out over time.

axx2• 11 years ago

I'm wondering how this would work with Apples privacy features?

Before any App can access your location, contacts, picture and so on, you need to give it permission.

ibbb• 11 years ago

Exactly, it specifically states: With your permission, we may...

Much about nothing...

danielsamuels2• 11 years ago

I would guess that the new sensor usage and GPS data is for the Spotify Running feature which was announced a while back. From what I remember, it changes your songs based on your running speed. Makes sense to require this additional data.

JustSomeNobody2• 11 years ago

I don't use spotify and I usually don't like social anything (except HN, of course). However...

Surely there are reasonable explanations. Let's break this down.

GPS and motion sensors. Why could they want this? Maybe they will switch up your play list when you go for that run. Seems plausible.

Contacts. Ok, everything is social, so maybe they want to send your current track to other spotify users in your contacts. Seems plausible.

Photos. Not sure about this one.

Sharing your information with partners. Does spotify play ads? wouldn't this be a standard part of sharing data with Apple and Google's ad network?

I'm not defending them, but this is the social world we live in. You either find alternatives or deal with apps that pack social features in.

charlesray8• 11 years ago

I THINK, and I could be totally wrong, but I THINK that on at least some platforms, when an app requires access to information stored locally on your phone, it's an all-or-nothing thing. So if Spotify needs permissions to local media files (which it obviously does) then there's no way to grant that without also giving it access to your local photos, for example. Could be totally wrong, I don't know, but I remember hearing that several times.

JustSomeNobody2• 11 years ago

That would make sense.

caractacus• 11 years ago

GPS and motion sensors. Why could they want this? Maybe they will switch up your play list when you go for that run. Seems plausible.

They introduced a running feature a few months ago that does, indeed, attempt to match the bpm of a playlist to your running cadence.

Contacts. Ok, everything is social, so maybe they want to send your current track to other spotify users in your contacts. Seems plausible.

Share a playlist with a contact. Share a track with a contact. Etc etc. I'm surprised this wasn't already in there if it's really a new addition.

Photos. Not sure about this one.

Might be related to running. Strava, fr'instance, lets you add photos taken on your run. Or might just be to let you adorn a playlist with your chosen photo.

Sharing your information with partners.

Doesn't everyone? Isn't this standard boilerplate? Spotify are attempting brand tie-ups in many areas so I can't see this as something out of the ordinary.

cholantesh3• 11 years ago

The photo one stumped me as well, but I figured it was something innocuous. I remember similarly misguided outrage over the Facebook app's 'new' permissions just a few months (I think) ago.

Side note: these features make me think I should probably switch from Rdio, though I guess some of those use cases are satisfied by Songza...

tmaly• 11 years ago

ok lets say this is true. If I want to continue using Spotify, how do I block them from looking at my pictures and contacts on a stock nexus 5 running a stock android 4.4.3 ?

tripzilch• 11 years ago

Local law may require that you seek the consent of your contacts to provide their personal information to Spotify

Uhm so how does that work?

I'm not a Spotify user, but quite a few people who have me in their contact list definitely are.

Let's say I don't consent. Which I don't.

Will they have to cancel their Spotify subscription?

Doesn't that responsibility fall with Spotify just as much?

Because in that case, I'll gladly provide my contact list, for Spotify's one time exclusive usage with which they can cancel all the subscriptions of everybody on it.

Spotify Just Got Real Creepy with the Data It Collects on You

Related Stories