Car Thing Device Users Sue Spotify to Challenge Service's Termination

Spotify announced May 23 that it made the “difficult decision” to discontinue Car Thing on Dec. 9 and that the devices “will no longer be operational.”

The four-inch device, which Spotify sold for $50-$100, connects to car dashboards and auxiliary vehicle outlets to enable drivers to listen to Spotify in their cars. Claims in the class action arise out of Spotify’s decision to “unilaterally and without recourse cut off its support of the Car Thing and announce its plan to terminate its functionality” in December “through a forced firmware update which will result in the device becoming obsolete.”

Spotify launched Car Thing in 2019 and brought it to the U.S. market in 2021, initially in a limited release “because we saw a need from our users, many of whom were missing out on a seamless and personalized in-car listening experience,” said company marketing materials. The streaming audio service later expanded U.S. distribution, pitching any U.S. Spotify customer “that ‘no matter the year or model of your vehicle, we feel everyone should have a superior listening experience,’” a spiel that “proved to be false,” the complaint said.

Hamza Mazumder, a Bronx, New York, resident; Anthony Bracarello, a Mary Esther, Florida, resident; and Luke Martin of Mohnton, Pennsylvania, bought Car Things from Spotify and now “own a useless product, and have been damaged thereby,” alleged the complaint. Had they known that Spotify “manufactured the Car Thing with the ability to brick the product at any point after its introduction to the marketplace and in Spotify’s total discretion,” they wouldn’t have bought the products “or would have paid substantially less for them,” it said.

The plaintiffs’ experiences with Car Thing mirror those of other purchasers, “as reflected by customer complaints,” alleged the complaint. “Since the announced discontinuance of Car Thing, numerous users have complained about Spotify’s planned obsolescence of the product by shutting down the servers, and failing to offer an appropriate remedy” to customers who bought one, it said. Spotify didn’t notify plaintiffs or class members of “the possibility of Spotify’s forced obsolescence of the Car Thing, especially so soon after purchase,” the complaint said.

Plaintiffs and class members who relied on Spotify’s marketing for Car Thing expected the device to work “as long as the user maintained a Spotify Premium account,” alleged the complaint. They “reasonably assumed that the servers supporting the Car Thing would remain available to support the product,” it said. Had they been aware that the company sold Car Thing “knowing it was manufactured with the ability to be remotely made obsolete,” they wouldn’t have bought the device, the complaint said.

Spotify’s “active and knowing concealment” of its intent to discontinue Car Thing “and shut down the servers when the product became unprofitable after Car Thing was first introduced in 2021”; its willful, false and misleading statements regarding the product’s multiple uses; and that Car thing “only requires a Spotify Premium account, results in the tolling of any applicable statute(s) of limitation,” said the complaint. Its “active concealment of, and breach of its duty to disclose the truth about its intent to brick the Spotify Car Thing” also tolls any applicable statute of limitations, the complaint said.

Plaintiffs claim violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the New York General Business Law, Florida’s Deceptive & Unfair Trade Practices Act and the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practice & Consumer Protection Law, plus trespass to chattels and unjust enrichment. They request for themselves and the class orders for Spotify to pay actual, statutory and punitive damages; a refund of the manufacturer’s suggested retail price for Car Thing; pre- and post-judgment interest; and attorneys’ fees and costs.