Plaud, we paid for remembered speakers. Why are we relabelling every meeting?
We bought Plaud to save time. On Sunday, 11 October, our meeting workflow started giving that work back to us.
Recurring speakers previously recognised by name are now “Speaker 2”, “Speaker 3”, and “Speaker 4”. Speaker separation still works. What has stopped working for us is remembering the same people across recordings.
We use Plaud at our company and spent months building up labels for colleagues and customers, with their consent. This was a major reason I chose the product. Now employees have to rename speakers in each meeting and regenerate summaries so the correct names appear. Across a team, that is recurring paid work.
Meanwhile, Plaud’s own documentation still describes recognising speakers in future recordings.
Plaud owes affected customers a clear explanation and a concrete remedy. If this functionality has been deliberately withdrawn during existing subscriptions, where was the advance notice? Why should customers absorb the extra work?
The issue is straightforward: a benefit we relied on has stopped working, the documentation still describes it, and the cost of the missing automation now falls on us.
Affected customers may have options before renewal:
EU consumers: Article 19 of Directive (EU) 2019/770 provides termination rights for qualifying changes that impair use by more than a minor amount, through national implementing law. In Germany, § 327r BGB sets advance-notice requirements and provides a 30-day right to terminate without charge, subject to its statutory conditions. The period runs from the required notice or change, whichever is later. § 327r(5), together with § 327o, governs applicable refunds, including unused prepaid subscription periods. Business contracts and hardware refunds need separate assessment. EU directive, § 327r BGB, § 327o BGB.
Misleading advertising: Advertising an unavailable feature can raise misleading-marketing concerns under § 5(1), (2)(1) UWG in Germany and Section 5 FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45(a), in the US. US customers can report concerns to the FTC or state consumer protection authorities. Individual refund rights depend on the contract and applicable law; the FTC does not resolve individual complaints. German law, FTC complaint guidance, FTC advertising rules.
Save the feature claims, purchase terms and any change notices. Request restoration or an appropriate remedy in writing. Where termination rights apply, expressly exercise them rather than simply turning off auto-renewal. If unresolved, pursue the refund or complaint route available to you.
I am reviewing these options for myself and our team, including legal enforcement if necessary. I would rather Plaud restore the functionality.
There are alternatives: Otter still documents learning speakers for future conversations. Plaud supports audio export, and Otter accepts imported recordings. The hardware investment is frustrating, but exported audio can be processed elsewhere. Automating that handoff is worth exploring where supported; it needs testing. Any applicable refund could help fund the switch.
Has anyone else experienced this? Which alternatives reliably remember recurring speakers?
Plaud: restore the functionality customers relied on. If you are withdrawing it, clearly state what cancellation and refund options affected customers have. A feature that won you customers can become the reason they leave.
We paid to save time. We should not have to become the automation.