Spotify hardens its stance on ad blockers

[midian182]

What just happened? It shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise to learn that Spotify doesn’t want people using ad blockers. To push this point home, the music streaming firm has updated its Terms of Service, explicitly stating that the practice can lead to immediate account termination.

Those who would rather listen to ads on Spotify’s free tier instead of paying $9.99 per month are warned that “circumventing or blocking advertisements in the Spotify Service, or creating and distributing tools designed to block advertisements in the Spotify Service” can result in “immediate termination or suspension of your Spotify account.”

Spotify already has multiple detection measures for identifying the use of ad blockers. When preparing for its IPO last year, it discovered 2 million users—1.3 percent of its total, or 2 percent of those on the free service—were accessing its free version via ad-blocking apps.

Those caught using the software were sent emails warnings that their accounts may be shut down if they kept using the third-party apps. Perpetrators could regain access by re-installing the official app or upgrading to the paid version of Spotify, but further use of the blockers could result in suspension or termination.

Now, the updated ToS, which come into effect on March 1, allow Spotify to delete an account instantly and without having to inform the owner first.

The news comes after Spotify’s last earnings report showed it had positive operating profit, net income, and free cash flow for the first time in its 13-year history. While subscriptions make up almost 90 percent of its revenue, the company still wants to protect the money it generates from ads.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/78657-spotify-hardens-stance-ad-blockers.html

 

[trparky]

A company that wants to make money! Won't someone please think of the children!

Please. If you want something from a company, be prepared to pay for it. If you don't want to pay for it, there's ads. Why? Because contrary to what a lot of people think, things do in fact cost money. Servers cost money, bandwidth costs money, and oh yeah... the content costs money. And it needs to paid for.

 

[psycros]

A company that wants to make money! Won't someone please think of the children!

Please. If you want something from a company, be prepared to pay for it. If you don't want to pay for it, there's ads. Why? Because contrary to what a lot of people think, things do in fact cost money. Servers cost money, bandwidth costs money, and oh yeah... the content costs money. And it needs to paid for.

Literally never known anyone who uses Spotify.

 

[trparky]

Literally never known anyone who uses Spotify.

Then what music service do you use?

 

[Mister_K]

A company that wants to make money! Won't someone please think of the children!

Please. If you want something from a company, be prepared to pay for it. If you don't want to pay for it, there's ads. Why? Because contrary to what a lot of people think, things do in fact cost money. Servers cost money, bandwidth costs money, and oh yeah... the content costs money. And it needs to paid for.

Literally never known anyone who uses Spotify.

Litterery never known anyone who uses anything but these 4:

Spotify
Apple Music
Soundcloud/Youtube

(in that order)

 

[Jeff Murray]

Can't say I have ever used Spotify or any other service. I own all the music I listen to.

 

[Knot Schure]

A company that wants to make money! Won't someone please think of the children!

Please. If you want something from a company, be prepared to pay for it. If you don't want to pay for it, there's ads. Why? Because contrary to what a lot of people think, things do in fact cost money. Servers cost money, bandwidth costs money, and oh yeah... the content costs money. And it needs to paid for.

Literally never known anyone who uses Spotify.

I've known just one...

 

[captaincranky]

Litterery never known anyone who uses anything but these 4:...[ ]....

"Litterery", reelie?

 

[captaincranky]

Can't say I have ever used Spotify or any other service. I own all the music I listen to.

Me too.

I play it on anachronistic devices known as "CD players".

 

[captaincranky]

the content costs money. And it needs to paid for.

There always seems to be some contention as to whether the content creators actually get paid, or it's just the RIAA's lawyers cashing in.

 

[trparky]

There always seems to be some contention as to whether the content creators actually get paid, or it's just the RIAA's lawyers cashing in.

That's been an issue since the old Napster days, it still doesn't take away from the fact that if you want something there needs to be an exchange of money to get said item. That's how a capitalist economy works.

 

[captaincranky]

That's been an issue since the old Napster days, it still doesn't take away from the fact that if you want something there needs to be an exchange of money to get said item. That's how a capitalist economy works.

I never suggested otherwise. For example, I've paid for each and every CD I own. Screw iTunes, screw Spotify (free or subscription), et al.

If worst comes to worst, I'll learn it on my guitar and play it in private, so I don't have to feel guilty for not paying public performance royalties

 

[Knot Schure]

Me too.

I play it on anachronistic devices known as "CD players".

SACD players.... that's where the quality is. Shame the catalogue is thin...

 

[captaincranky]

SACD players.... that's where the quality is. Shame the catalogue is thin...

Either that, or 24 bit FLAC, which can be also quite elusive.

 

[Tantor]

Sheesh, this is so typical of the modern 'zero tolerance' attitude.

How about doing what most sites do? Just flash a warning message and keep people from accessing the music until they shut down their ad blocker. It's real simple.

Opera has a built in ad blocker. I keep it on unless the site warns me. Then I just turn it off. No problem.

But any site that arbitrarily deletes my account without any warning is going to get permanently deleted, and I will make sure to tell all my friends.

In the long run it will cost them money as they offend people.

Frankly, I think there's more to this than ad revenue. An ad blocker prevents a lot of anonymous sites from harvesting your browsing data. Try out the extension uMatrix. It lists all the external sites get notified when you load in a page. Some pages have literally hundreds of external links.

Spotify was probably offered a lot of money.

 

[Mr Majestyk]

I used to use Pandora before they pulled out of Australia, now I use iPod, iHeartRadio and Spotify. I like iHeartRadio better than Spotify and maybe if Spotify had a something like a $50 a year subscription I’d take it up, but really the ads are only minor compared to 20 minutes per hour you get on FM or digital radio stations, so the free version is perfectly fine dfor what I want.

 

[CybaGirl]

Please excuse my ignorance but what is Spotify anyway?

 

[Mister_K]

"Litterery", reelie?

Can never spell that and "Intergrate"

 

[Mister_K]

This thread is summarized quite easily.

 

[cliffordcooley]

This thread is summarized quite easily.

The meme is lost on me. What has hiding under a rock, got to do with people using Ad-blockers?

 

[captaincranky]

Can never spell that and "Intergrate"

"The rain in Spain falls mainly on the 'ally'".....

"Liter...ally". It has one less "T" than "trash's friend".

 

[Mister_K]

The meme is lost on me. What has hiding under a rock, got to do with people using Ad-blockers?

Nothing, it's aimed at "Spoti-what?". Maybe it's just the average age of the community. So much for "Tech"spot.

 

[DanS78]

Well, the Digital marketing industry bought this down upon themselves. It's estimated that a quarter to a third of internet users now use ad blockers in one form or another. Now, they are being built into browser and activated by default.

 

[captaincranky]

Well, the Digital marketing industry bought this down upon themselves. It's estimated that a quarter to a third of internet users now use ad blockers in one form or another. Now, they are being built into browser and activated by default.

Well, Google nurtures the concept that if you advertise with them, you product or service will get so much exposure, you'll become an overnight millionaire. They are of course, full of it.

Advertisers wisdom holds that if you annoy the crap out of people, they'll eventually buy your product. They're mistaken, at least in my case.

I have great sales resistance, and I only buy things I want, need, or choose to.

My credit card company(s), some times offer price matching services after purchase, of which I've yet to be able to take advantage.

I shop thoroughly, before I order, and pull the trigger when the price on anything I want, has bottomed out.

Distilled, I guess my strategy is I'll go to the ads, and refuse to allow you to bring them to me.

When I hit a site that tells me I should turn off my ad blocker, I simply leave that site. They can save the guilt trip narrative for the next sucker who stumbles along.