Sonos Sues Lenbrook for Bluesound and BluOS, Alleging Patent Infringement

IMO, the multi room trick isn't as valuable as it was before the advent of streaming services over the net. Prior to that, the ability to play different music in different rooms from a single NAS was very useful. Now, everyone that has a device can stream the music of their choice to a speaker in their room; many don't even have a NAS. So why does one even need multi room in the Sonos flavour?

Whether this music is streamed via the more sensible casting route that takes the phone out of the loop, or via the streaming from the device all the time route adopted by BT or Airplay.

I doubt if the big boys - Apple, Google or Amazon - are paying any fees to Sonos. If not, I also don't think that they would be doing what they already do in this space in violation of Sonos patent rights.


I know multi-room has never held much use for you, but I use it every single day. It was the single fundamental reason for me buying Sonos, and I dare say that holds true for many, if not the majority, of Sonos users. It is certainly the feature that separates Sonos from individual Bluetooth or wired speakers.

I know multi-room has never held much use for you, but I use it every single day. It was the single fundamental reason for me buying Sonos, and I dare say that holds true for many, if not the majority, of Sonos users. It is certainly the feature that separates Sonos from individual Bluetooth or wired speakers.
Why do you use it so? To play the same music in different rooms, or different music in different rooms? In the latter case, is it single source from a NAS or multiple sources?

As to the other part, it may well be that with the large sales of play 1 and now One units, that must easily outnumber all other Sonos product sales by volume, the user profile may have shifted away from how it was before these sales.

Also in my case what I use multi room for is for balanced coverage in a large open plan living/dining/patio, that has a combination of Connect/Connect Amp/Play 1 units across it. Here, now that I have Echo Dots wired to line in jacks, I am able to get this coverage even via Alexa based permanent Dot groups, with the same perfect sync and stable music play as when I use Sonos groups; if I were buying new therefore, and did not need NAS based music, Sonos would not be a default choice as it was back in 2011.

I have no idea about this, but this Echo driven multi room approach may not be in violation of Sonos patents, and if so, limits any Sonos stranglehold on multi room. I don't know how well HomePods do this, but it looks likely that Apple has their own multi room solution as well, reinforcing the point if that is so.

@Kumar don't you have at least one pair, of Play:1s? With a Sub attached? Well, that's 'multi-room'. A bonded set is a special type of group.

@ratty: see my post just prior to yours, that acknowledges what you say.

Why do you use it so? To play the same music in different rooms, or different music in different rooms? In the latter case, is it single source from a NAS or multiple sources?

As to the other part, it may well be that with the large sales of play 1 and now One units, that must easily outnumber all other Sonos product sales by volume, the user profile may have shifted away from how it was before these sales.

I use it every way possible. Same source in multiple rooms, different sources in different rooms, and combinations of the two. Just this morning I grouped my bedroom wake up music with the bathroom, then transferred it to the kitchen. I play music from an NAS, SiriusXM, Amazon Music, and TuneIn. Also, seeing as I just moved into a new condo with a large open great room, I see multi-room to be used even more.

As to the second part, I assume anyone paying $200 has considered the capabilities that make it cost $200 instead of $50-$100 for a Bluetooth speaker, and have made their decision based on those differences. Multi-room capability is certainly one of those differences.

Re:multiroom, I listen to podcasts or lectures while cleaning or working around the house, so having it play in all rooms is nice. I also use it for entertaining, so I have the same music inside and outside the house. It really is a great thing, and I’m glad Sonos kicked off this boom, but is multiroom specific enough for a 20 year hold? I have a hard time swallowing that something that broad deserves a patent. The method of synchronizing multiple rooms? Sure - show your work, show your math. But the availability of multiroom synced audio, while cool, is not innovative enough for a patent, and in fact giving one company total control over that market for that long. I’m in IT, and we’ve had technologies that lasted less 20 years but still an impact. Moreso, this stifles rather than promotes innovation, imho, when it comes to software.

I have a hard time swallowing that something that broad deserves a patent. The method of synchronizing multiple rooms? Sure - show your work, show your math.
Interesting comment that, and it is the basis for the argument that India advances against the West when it comes to patent protection law enforcement.
Based on what little I understand of this subject, the West grants product patents, that protect the product, never mind how it is made. India grants and therefore protects only process patents, that therefore allow the making of the same product via a different process. Where this battle becomes serious is when it comes to the pharma industry.
China, I suspect, simply does not bother to argue, with very little protection offered in Chinese courts.

I'm not terribly familiar with how Apple's version of multiroom works, but if they did copy Sonos in any way, I'd have to say no. Apple holds way too much leverage over Sonos because of all the other products and services they offer.I don't know if this is true. Sonos (reportedly) used the threat of patent infringement litigation to reach an agreement with Google re assistant + Sonos integration. They may have already done the same with apple (first to get apple music, airplay 2etc). Smart play by Sonos with Google for sure.

That was my statement, not Belly's.

I mentioned Google integration case already. Agreed that they did use this as a threat, but it feels more like a bluff to me. I doublt Sonos would have actually sued them if Google had refused.

As far as Apple goes, the timing doesn't work. Apple music has worked with Sonos long before Apple had their own version of multiroom audio. Airplay 2 shouldn't have required any leverage on Sonos part because it was clearly in Apple's best interest to have it work on Sonos. It was a new protocol that Apple wanted to be widely used and adopted quickly. Besides, Sonos is by far the only A/V brand that work with airplay 2. For Apple to deny it from Sonos while allowing it for others would have been a clear violation.

Also in my case what I use multi room for is for balanced coverage in a large open plan living/dining/patio, that has a combination of Connect/Connect Amp/Play 1 units across it. Here, now that I have Echo Dots wired to line in jacks, I am able to get this coverage even via Alexa based permanent Dot groups, with the same perfect sync and stable music play as when I use Sonos groups; if I were buying new therefore, and did not need NAS based music, Sonos would not be a default choice as it was back in 2011.

@Kumar, you're original point was that multiroom capabilities aren't that useful anymore. Now it seems like you've shifted to say that Sonos multiroom capabilities aren't that valuable and you can accomplish multiroom by other means, like Dot groups. I don't think there's any disagreement about this separate point since Sonos certainly isn't the only brand offering multroom capabilities. The question, to me anyway, is whether Sonos does multroom better than the competition, and whether competition has 'cheated' by copying patents that Sonos holds.

I have no idea about this, but this Echo driven multi room approach may not be in violation of Sonos patents, and if so, limits any Sonos stranglehold on multi room. I don't know how well HomePods do this, but it looks likely that Apple has their own multi room solution as well, reinforcing the point if that is so.

I don't think echo is in violation personally. There are quite a few features lacking with echos that Sonos has. The two biggest features I see is the ability to add/remove streams to an existing stream. With echos, you can only set the rooms in the group when you initiate playback. The second factor is that echo only works with streaming sources. It does not work with local libraries or line-in sources (including TVs). Even their latest product, echo link, which has a line in, specifically points out that you can't do multiroom with it.

I would guess that removing these features allows Alexa to do a much more rudimentary, less dynamic method of multiroom that is completely different than Sonos. I'd also say that, this basic multiroom capability probably meets the needs of a big chuck of the market who only stream and don't think Sonos multiroom adds enough value, or aren't aware of what that functionality can give them.