Skip to Content

The big problem with Anchor.fm, the hot new podcasting app

This post may contain affiliate links and/or codes. You won’t pay anything extra, but I might make a commission.

Are you looking for a place to record and host your podcast? Anchor.fm looks fantastic on the surface, but there's a potential problem lurking underneath.
Are you looking for a place to record and host your podcast? Anchor.fm looks fantastic on the surface, but there's a potential problem lurking underneath. #podcast #podcasting

Are you looking for a place to record and host your podcast? Anchor.fm looks fantastic on the surface, but there’s a potential problem lurking underneath.

Are you looking for a place to record and host your podcast? Anchor.fm looks fantastic on the surface, but there's a potential problem lurking underneath. #podcast #podcasting

UPDATE: There’s been an important change to the Anchor podcasting app’s TOS! You can read about it here. 

I’ve been podcasting since 2010, so I know my way around the business a little bit. I’ve started podcasts from scratch and know what a pain the process can be. A few weeks ago I needed to find a home for two new podcasts, plus an existing podcast with a large number of back episodes. A former producer of mine recommended Anchor.fm, so I checked it out, and was really impressed. It appears to let you do everything in one place: set up a new podcast or move an existing podcast (with no storage limits), set the episodes up for automatic distribution, record your audio on the mobile app (including guests and co-hosts), insert theme songs and sound effects without having to do advanced editing, embed it, promote it, and even make a transcribed video. Wow. It was everything I was looking for!

And, it’s free. 

I was all set to sign up and get started, but first I read the Terms of Service. I’m not going to claim that I always read the fine print on everything, but when it comes to my content I try to be careful about where I put it and what I allow. And what I saw in Anchor’s terms (the version revised on February 7th, 2016) were absolutely a no-go.

I’m not a lawyer, but Anchor has written their “License Grant” section pretty plainly. Go on over and read it, it’s about two-thirds of the way down the page. In short, anything you upload to their service, or record using their service, is fair game for them to use however they want. They state very clearly that while you still own your content, they have the right to use it in any way they see fit without compensating you. The section starts like this:

By submitting User Content through the Services, you hereby do and shall grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, fully paid, sublicensable and transferable license to use, edit, modify (including the right to create derivative works of), aggregate, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, perform, and otherwise fully exploit the User Content in connection with the operation of the the Services, the promotion, advertising or marketing of the Services, or any other purposes.

The terms go on to state that they or their partners can broadcast your work, publish it, make derivative works from it, syndicate it, and more. All without having to compensate you, and without your permission. Or, technically, you’ve given them permission by using their service. 

And, their license to do all of this survives you canceling your account and deleting your content from their app or website.

Anchor is a business, and while they seem to be flush with start-up money right now, eventually they’ll have to turn a profit. And they’ll have a lot of content with which to do so. I’ve never seen such broad terms for this kind of service. They could insert ads into your podcast with or without giving you a cut, sell your podcast content to someone else, or syndicate your content forever. And while I imagine that they will eventually offer some kind of revenue share with their users, they won’t have to.

I’m not accusing Anchor of doing anything shady; like I said, they’ve written these terms out very plainly. I’m just cautioning all podcasters out there to think about what it would mean to give your content to someone else, with absolutely no control over how it could be used, forever.

I hope I’m wrong about all of this, and that there’s no cause for alarm. But I keep seeing Anchor.fm recommended, on big websites and in Facebook groups, with absolutely no discussion of these broad usage terms. I’m not even saying that people shouldn’t use this service – the tech looks pretty great. Putting up podcasts can be a pain, and I recognize that if you’re not podcasting professionally, you might not be concerned with how your content is used or whether you’re compensated for that use. There are a lot of moving parts to creating, publishing, distributing, and promoting a podcast, and I applaud Anchor.fm for making a platform that seems to streamline this process. I just want people who are thinking of using Anchor to be fully informed about what using the service means. 

If, in the future, podcasters end up making good money with Anchor, I’m sure I’ll be kicking myself for not hopping on. But the terms as they are now make me very nervous.

I contacted Anchor for a comment on this topic, and their preliminary response was this:

I can confirm that Anchor users retain all ownership rights they have in the content that they put on Anchor. You are free to do whatever you want with that content! But by putting it in Anchor, you do grant us the licenses outlined in our Terms of Service to allow us to do things like distribute the content on your behalf and promote Anchor podcasts on behalf of our users.

Personally, I think that statement sidesteps the very broad rights outlined in the terms, which go way beyond distributing and promoting on users’ behalf. I’ve asked several follow-up questions and will update this post if/when I receive answers.

James D Black

Friday 3rd of April 2020

What are some of the more podcasting sites for a new beginner like myself?

Amy Oztan

Saturday 4th of April 2020

Anchor *is* a good site for a beginner, but in exchange for a small learning curve, you're trading some rights to your podcast. Check the update to this post.

Max

Thursday 9th of May 2019

First, a s a new podcaster Amy, I am grateful for your expertise on podcasting. This article especially due to the fact it confirms my take on the matter. I created an Anchor account and was eager to start podcasting. Their info is a very effective hook; it reels in the eager podcaster by presenting all the great things their platform offers but there is not any mention of the terms -- 100% of their focus, information presentation wise, is on what the user benefits from via Anchor and it being free. They leave it up to the user to find and read the terms, which is a red flag as a result of my background (30+ years in risk management and investigations of businesses). Very few will bother to look for much less read the terms of any agreement. Anchor knows this. They hope this is the case for 100% of users. They literally bank on it in fact because these podcasts can be millions of dollars in profits. This falls under the intellectual property (IP) laws which I hold expertise in. A podcast is considered media; and a media creation is owned by its creator; and said media (podcast) is an intellectual property.

This IP can be licensed, syndicated, transferred and otherwise used to earn millions of dollars for Anchor and who do you think they're more interested in: the user or their own bottom line?! The latter of course is their focus. You certainly know this but many others evidently do not and while I wish I could say it's shocking or surprising, it's however neither due to knowing that few people understand IP and its value. Not to mention other legal matters including terms and conditions.

What sucks is the other options take a VERY high share of the profits. Liberated Syndication Services (Libsyn) for example collects at least 50%! That's half of what you're producing! This is asinine. PodBean takes 30%. These are way too high percentages. Furthermore, their terms are not so different from Anchor. Some of the same legalspeak occurs such what Anchor said in response to your inquiry -- namely, that the user owns their content, But yet they require the user giving away rights to the platform so as to distribute it. Well, distributing IP does NOT require any transfer in rights! It occurs via an agreement. This grabbing of rights is done due to consumer ignorance; no other option is presented and so the podcaster (or other creator) consents to it due to the fact they don't know that they don't know (non-awareness/ ignorance).

Well, there are lies of omission going on which is deception -- not disclosing the alternative options for which media is distributed, etc. Only presenting the taking of rights as a sole option for getting podcasts promoted and distributed and sold, which not coincidentally represents the best case scenario for such parties due to the profits they get from IP rights, regardless of who owns the content. They use that word "ownership (of the podcast being the user's)" in a manipulative way; like dangling a carrot in front of the user, to get the uninformed user to trust them that they (the user) "owns their content" ... well if that were the case, legally speaking, there would be no mention of rights being transferred in the terms!

Charles Stern

Monday 26th of November 2018

You've inspired me to read the TOS. If that's the deal, it bothers me that they can exploit my content without notice or attribution. Right now it seems unlikely it will ever matter, but what if I interview somebody that later becomes famous. Anchor's going to license a clip? I get nothing, not even a credit? That's not ideal.

Amy Oztan

Tuesday 27th of November 2018

Exactly. I'm amazed by some people's blasé attitude about it. I haven't checked the TOS since I wrote the update, and the change they made there is significant, so I'm not as worried as I was when I wrote this post (if you haven't read it, basically, they took out the "in perpetuity" part), but I would still rather pay for a better contract.

eyal matsliah

Monday 20th of August 2018

Thanks Amy. I've just created a podcast with anchor.fm and now considering moving to libsyn.

There might be another way to look at it.

I hear Gary Vaynerchuk whispering, ok, well, shouting at me : GET THE FUCK OVER IT. IF YOUR CONTENT IS GOOD ENOUGH, IT WILL BE GREAT IF THEY SHARE IT OR EVEN SELL IT. THAT WILL JUST IMPROVE YOUR BRAND AND YOUR LEGACY.

so i'm aware of both sides.

another major downside for me is the embed-able player is shit.

Thank you for actually reading the TOC.

John Thomas Tvrz

Saturday 6th of June 2020

Gary the wino V. suck?

Brittany Ratelle

Monday 11th of June 2018

I completely agree with you Amy!! I just checked Anchor.Fm's terms (sligthly updated -- but still really scary) vs. the most updated Libsyn Terms and they are NIGHT vs. friggin DAY. I am going to do a blurb about this -- DO NOT PASS GO -- DO NOT give your rights away to your content (which is essentialy what you are doing in signing up for Anchor.fm -- how is this not getting any attention???

Amy Oztan

Wednesday 13th of June 2018

Ooh, I'll check out the update! I was hoping they would feel some pressure and maybe improve things, but even people I've spoken to in the industry have been like, whatever - it's a good trade-off for the service. I don't get it.

Privacy Policy ~ Full Disclosure ~ Disclaimer