This unhealthy trend has spread overseas, and Spotify has also learned to guard against its users as if they were thieves.

The crackdown on account sharing has finally swept into the music streaming industry. In recent days, a large number of Spotify users subscribed to the Premium Family plan have found that they have received a residential address verification notice from Spotify, requiring members of the family subscription plan to scan a dynamic QR code to prove that they live at the same residence as the subscription manager.

Among them, the subscription manager needs to open the Spotify app on their mobile phone, go to the profile page, select "Your Premium" and then enter "Manage" to find the QR code for verification. Other members need to scan this QR code with their own mobile phones to complete the identity and residence verification. To prevent users from taking screenshots of the QR code and sending them to relatives and friends in different locations, Spotify has specially set up a dynamic QR code mechanism.

Different from the common static QR codes used for merchant payment, this type of dynamic QR code for verification will automatically refresh every few seconds, so users cannot simply take a screenshot and send it to others. Once users of the Premium Family subscription plan fail to complete the verification within the specified period, they will be penalized by Spotify, and will not be allowed to join other family subscription plans or the Duo plan for the next 12 months.

As soon as this news came out, Spotify users were in an uproar. Even family members do not necessarily live together. For example, students who leave home for college may continue to use the subscription plan managed by their parents. This time, Spotify's approach to Premium Family is too crude. This verification mechanism does not confirm whether there is a kinship or friendship between users, but targets anyone who does not meet the co-residence requirement.

There are not many companies cracking down on account sharing, ranging from Netflix to Disney, Microsoft to Tencent, but only Spotify's operation is too blatant. Thanks to the sharing nature of the Internet, the threshold for account sharing is almost non-existent, which can be described as "one person pays, relatives and friends enjoy". Nowadays, a gray industrial chain has been formed around account sharing, and gray industry teams are providing time-sharing rental services for paid members of streaming platforms on a large scale.

However, when it comes to cracking down on account sharing, other manufacturers adopt more hidden methods, which basically distinguish users based on IP addresses and WiFi connections. Spotify, on the other hand, reverses the burden of proof, asking users to prove that they are not sharing their accounts. The reason why this operation by Spotify has caused a huge uproar is that they treat users as potential cheaters.

After all, people use Spotify to listen to music, not to prove their innocence. So the question arises, why is Spotify so crude? Haven't video streaming platforms such as Netflix and Hulu already demonstrated how to crack down on shared accounts? In fact, Spotify is once bitten, twice shy.

On April 28 this year, Spotify released its financial report for the first quarter of 2026. However, because its guidance on the net increase of paid subscribers and gross profit margin in the second quarter did not fully meet market expectations, its stock price plummeted. It expects to add 6 million paid users in the second quarter of this year, which is lower than the 7 million estimated by the market based on the growth in the second quarter of previous years, making investment institutions doubt whether the company's two consecutive quarters of price increases in North America have caused user churn.

The user churn caused by price increases is like the Sword of Damocles hanging over Spotify's head. In order to ensure the momentum of user growth, it is natural for them to crack down on account sharing to tap potential paid users. Moreover, as a music streaming platform, Spotify also faces a pressure that video streaming platforms have not felt for the time being, that is, the AI subversion theory.

At this stage, AI video models can generate up to 30 seconds of content at a time. To make a 120-minute AI movie or dozens of episodes of AI TV series is only slightly easier than live-action shooting. But AI music is different. Models such as Suno and Yinchao can already directly generate a complete song. According to Spotify, over the past year, they have removed more than 50 million AI-generated low-quality junk songs or junk traffic songs that were identified from users' recommendation feeds.

Due to the impact of AI music, users' willingness to pay for Spotify continues to decline. If people are paying to listen to AI music, why not find free options? Spotify cannot answer this question, so it can only say that it has adjusted the recommendation system to prioritize the music works of real creators.

New paid users are squeezed by AI, and price increases have discouraged old users. Obviously, Spotify is facing considerable pressure at present. However, Netflix's story tells Spotify that cracking down on account sharing through conventional methods is slow to take effect, and the only way to solve the problem quickly is to use unconventional tricks.

This article is from the WeChat Official Account "Three Easy Life" (ID: IT-3eLife), the author is San Yijun, and it is released with authorization from 36Kr.