Seems as though crash reporting is now deemed harmful. Strange take by the community.
It's not people suddenly objecting a standard practice - it's another episode of the ongoing fight against attempts to normalize this practice.
That has nothing to do with crash reporting, and there is no sane reason for a desktop, offline audio editor to collect such data.
The problem arrives when people start actually reading these vague and wide conditions. It's a bit like when you tell your son or daughter to take some money to go to the movies, and when you find out they have taken 500$ they say "don't worry, I won't use it all, but at least I'll be sure to have enough".
If they would have explicitly stated what they were logging, and for what purpose, I think reactions would have been much less.
Personally, I would have asked for permission upon crashing, with a button to show what is being sent.
> "data necessary for law enforcement, litigation, and authorities' requests (if any),"
This is very different from "crash reporting".
IP addresses aren't really super-reliable for this (corporate networks, ISP NAT), but many people still are under the misapprehension that they are, and it's probably reliable enough for this purpose.
I don't know if that's the reason; but it could be.