While there is room for arguments whether these changes to Audacity actually constitutes spying, I believe it's rather their vague wording (and potential reach) that worries people. Rightfully so, I would say. More often than not, developments like these don't end up well. Also the relative little info there is known about this new owner (or backers) appears worrisome.

Anyone knows if there is more known about this new owner, their history and or financial backers?

When this news initially broke, I remember there was a lot of mystery (with some few red flags) surrounding this new owner. I got an uncomfortable feeling that this could even be a front or proxy for a commercial entity that sees Audacity as competition. Not sure how much was payed, but this could be a relatively cheap way of knocking out an open source alternative. On the other hand, abusing an existing install base for any kind of intelligence harvesting also is a popular business model these days (actually criminal in many countries, but sadly hardly ever enforced as such).

Either way, after reading several pages of back and forth on this issue a while ago, I'm convinced that these new owners either don't quite get what they bought (or what it means) or that they do but simply can't really care (and therefore can't be trusted).

Until there's a fork, I'm not toughing this with a ten feet pole.