SoundCloud class action alleges company charged illegal price increases

SoundCloud class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Plaintiff Rutik Shinglot filed a class action lawsuit against SoundCloud Global Limited & Co. KG.
• Why: Shinglot claims SoundCloud illegally charged him for a price increase for his SoundCloud Go+ subscription.
• Where: The SoundCloud class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

A new class action lawsuit alleges SoundCloud illegally charged customers for a price increase for its premium subscription service.

Plaintiff Rutik Shinglot filed the class action lawsuit against SoundCloud Global Limited & Co. KG on Feb. 21 in California federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer protection laws.

SoundCloud is an online music streaming service that offers a premium subscription service, SoundCloud Go, which enables ad-free listening, unlimited offline listening, greater catalogue access and other streaming benefits.

However, Shinglot claims SoundCloud violated California’s Automatic Renewal Law (ARL) and the federal Restore Online Shoppers Confidence Act (ROSCA) by failing to clearly disclose potential price increases for its SoundCloud Go subscription service.

The ARL and ROSCA require companies to clearly and conspicuously disclose any potential price increases for automatically renewing subscriptions and obtain consumers’ affirmative consent before charging them higher prices.

Shinglot claims SoundCloud did not comply with these requirements when it increased the monthly price of its SoundCloud Go+ subscription from $9.99 to $10.99 in August 2024.

SoundCloud allegedly hid price increase disclosure in terms and conditions

SoundCloud’s primary defense is that it disclosed the potential for price increases in the SoundCloud Go+ Terms and Conditions, Shinglot says.

However, he claims this defense lacks merit because the disclosure was buried in inconspicuously linked terms and was not clear and conspicuous as required by law.

Shinglot claims SoundCloud’s failure to comply with the upfront disclosure requirements for price increases makes the company’s subsequent email notification of the price increase insufficient.

He argues that under the ARL and ROSCA, passive consent is legally insufficient and companies must obtain consumers’ affirmative consent for price increases.

Shinglot wants to represent all persons enrolled in a SoundCloud Go subscription in California, where the price of the monthly subscription was increased within the statute of limitations period.

He is demanding a jury trial and requesting damages, restitution and other forms of equitable relief for himself and all class members.

In another subscription service lawsuit, four plaintiffs accused Sirius XM Radio of deceiving its Oregon-based subscribers with a fake “royalty fee.”

What do you think of the claims in this SoundCloud class action lawsuit? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Jonas Jacobson, Simon Franzini and Christin Cho of Dovel & Luner LLP.

The SoundCloud class action lawsuit is Shinglot v. SoundCloud Global Limited & Co. KG, Case No. 2:25-cv-1518, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Colgate class action claims Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse unsafe for young children
• Three separate class action lawsuits allege Apple lied about iPhone 16 AI capabilities
• Ford class action alleges Transit Trail recall remedy devalues vehicles
• Helzberg Diamonds allegedly misleads shoppers with fake discounts