European Regulators Concerned Apple's Proposed Shazam Acquisition Could Hurt Competitors Like Spotify

[cocky jeremy]

The EU sure seems to have a problem with companies trying not to waste their customers' time. I'm sure all of this has NOTHING to do with Spotify being an EU based company.

If they deny it, Shazam should just sell to another US company, then Apple just buys that company.

 

[dumastudetto]

Actually, no, it sounds like they understand exactly what Shazam is. Shazam is a music search engine that relies on audio input instead of typed text. It identifies the song, then tells you where you can listen to it.

If Apple acquired it, Apple could change it to only ever list Apple Music as a place you can listen to songs, and never mention that competitors can also stream the same song.

Or Apple could be more subtle about it, and just prioritize Apple Music results above other results.

This isn’t unique technology though. There are other apps that can do it, Google Assistant can do it, etc. There’s no reason to stop this deal or interfere with whatever Apple has planned.

 

[SeattleMoose]

EU regulators? Well I guess the French did invent scuba diving...but this time they are diving a bit too deep.
My advice to Apple...ignore the EU...they are an empire in decline.

 

[mudflap]

they can't, but you have an option to don't buy this expensive and intentionally limited mono speaker

For the tech inside of it, the HomePod is actually quite inexpensive. And it might not be true stereo but it's not exactly mono, either.

 

[chucker23n1]

If they deny it, Shazam should just sell to another US company, then Apple just buys that company.

That wouldn't change a thing, unless Apple wants to exit the European market. If Apple were to buy that other company, the EU would have a say.

 

[KeanosMagicHat]

They should have zero control over that. Apple manufactures and sells its Homepod and has a right to limit its streaming services to Apple Music only.

And in exercising that right, Apple is actually hampering HomePod sales (in my opinion).
[doublepost=1524510968][/doublepost]

It almost sounds as though they don't actually understand what Shazam is. Like they're assuming it's another music streaming service.

The complaint is that Spotify and other streaming services currently get referrals from Shazam which the EU regulators presume would stop if Apple were to buy the company.

 

[t76turbo]

Why does some eurotrash regulator have any say on 2 American companies doing business? I am sure they have some ability to regulate Apples products coming into their countries if they felt something was amiss... But why is the deal being held up?

The story said they have the power. 'delaying an Apple-Shazam merger for at least 90 days.'

 

[KeanosMagicHat]

My question is simply this. If the EU rejects Apple’s acquisition of Shazam, does that effect what happens in the rest of the world, including the USA? Does Europe’s rejection mean that we can’t have this new combined service on OUR devices? I’m so sick of this “new world order” crap!

Money talks, so it will depend on how much Apple really wants Shazam.

If Apple are determined, I suspect this will end up with some sort of deal where the Apple owned Shazam continues to list other streaming services, but is allowed to prioritise Apple Music.

The ongoing data received by Shazam from hooks into these streaming competitors could prove a more complicated negotiation, however.

[doublepost=1524511539][/doublepost]

Why does some eurotrash regulator have any say on 2 American companies doing business? I am sure they have some ability to regulate Apples products coming into their countries if they felt something was amiss... But why is the deal being held up?

The story said they have the power. 'delaying an Apple-Shazam merger for at least 90 days.'

This is globalisation – it’s a global world with global customers for international businesses such as these, no matter where their headquarters are based.

 

[wschutz]

EU regulators? Well I guess the French did invent scuba diving...but this time they are diving a bit too deep.
My advice to Apple...ignore the EU...they are an empire in decline.

An empire of more than 500 million people (compared to the 325 million people in the US). I wouldn't ignore such 'declining' empire
BTW, what do you base your statement on?
[doublepost=1524512610][/doublepost]

This isn’t unique technology though. There are other apps that can do it, Google Assistant can do it, etc. There’s no reason to stop this deal or interfere with whatever Apple has planned.

In the EU the citizen (aka... the user/customer) is more important than the business (aka the profit).
It is not that it is possible to do it with other applications, the EU wants to guarantee to all its citizens a fair share of options (aka competition). If there is a risk that a big player overtakes the smaller competition, which can't afford perhaps fighting against such giant, the EU will not let this happen.
The state of welfare is a must in the EU, and that includes having a competitive market for everyone.

 

[apolloa]

Well this a clever manipulative piece of reporting by Mac Rumors... typically written in Apples favour ignoring all the facts...

The ACTUAL reason the purchase is being investigated is because it will give Apple access to Spotify’s and others commercially sensitive data. And understandably the competition commission isn’t happy with that.

http://news.sky.com/story/ec-to-investigate-apples-shazam-takeover-over-competition-concerns-11344191

The European Commission said it was concerned that the takeover could see rivals' music streaming services put at a competitive disadvantage to Apple Music.

This is because Apple would obtain commercially sensitive data about its rivals' customers by owning Shazam, according to the EC's initial findings.

 

[dernhelm]

I decided to dive in a read the comments here to see if I anyone could shed light on the bizarre logic of this proposed blocking of this buyout. Any ruling preventing a merger would have to have some basis in actual fact, and prevent an actual undesirable situation. The initial quote didn't give any real information: It seemed to indicate that they're worried about lack of choice in music streaming services, but since Shazam doesn't stream music - Apple buying them doesn't reduce the actual number of streaming services. So that can't be it.

A quote further down said something about competitive data, and Apple could use it for nefarious purposes. Which I suppose is true, but wouldn't that be true of any streaming service that wanted to buy them? If this were a real concern, Shazam could not be bought by ANY streaming service because it has compiled too much user data, giving whoever bought them some kind of unfair advantage. I can't see that as a real thing. There would be too much counter-precedent, companies with data on other companies have been bought and sold for generations. Would this logic apply to patents as well? There would never be another merger in the EU ever again.

 

[rom3o]

Why does some eurotrash regulator have any say on 2 American companies doing business?

Last time I checked Shazam was a British company.

 

[ActionableMango]

To anyone still using Shazam...they were great in their time, but these days Soundhound is significantly better.

 

[weckart]

To anyone still using Shazam...they were great in their time, but these days Soundhound is significantly better.

I found the opposite to be true. Shazam has improved as Soundhound has declined.

 

[Wanted797]

They should have zero control over that. Apple manufactures and sells its Homepod and has a right to limit its streaming services to Apple Music only.

Exactly. Trying to for Spotify in a HomePod is like trying to demand Apples Macs come with Windows!

Which funny enough they do all be it through other apps like VMWare. But Apple has no obligation to support it.

 

[Abazigal]

I can’t see any logical reason for this aquisition other than to hurt the competition in which case it’s bad for us all.

Shazam also has its own AR platform which is possibly one reason as to why Apple acquired it.

http://news.shazam.com/pressrelease...reality-solution-for-brands-worldwide-1842402

And in exercising that right, Apple is actually hampering HomePod sales (in my opinion).

While simultaneously locking users into Apple Music and the iPhone.

Might be a worthwhile tradeoff for Apple.

 

[bladerunner2000]

They should have zero control over that. Apple manufactures and sells its Homepod and has a right to limit its streaming services to Apple Music only.

And that's why its a failed product.

 

[Tech198]

Looks like Apples got problem on it's hands.

You can't have everything.

 

[Brandhouse]

It's called competition. Sounds like the EU are loosing the plot.

 

[KeanosMagicHat]

. . . While simultaneously locking users into Apple Music and the iPhone.

Might be a worthwhile tradeoff for Apple.

I understand why they’ve done it, but I still think it’s questionable.

At the moment the only people that would buy HomePod are those that are fully bought into the Apple ecosystem.

Do you not think the market would widen significantly for the device were it able to stream from other providers?

Apple lately have been taking a bit of flak for the disappointing sales of HomePod thus far. They will need to decide whether they want to keep using it as a device for Apple Music subscribers only or whether they want to address these sales figures.

 

[Mascots]

This isn't about choosing a streaming service. This is about safeguarding against the possibility of Apple stifling competition by removing access to "backend" Shazam which is used by multiple services. It's also about Apple not being able to analyze competitors data that Shazam has accrued over the years. Further, if Shazam's hooks into other companies were allowed to remain, would Apple be allowed to continue to analyze that data?

This investigation's only concern with the data Shazam has accrued is if Apple could attempt to abuse it to push people to switch to Apple Music. It has absolutely nothing to do with the general gaining of data from acquisition, data access hooks, or potential removal of analytics access from competitors.

This is primarily about potentially limiting referrals to other services because of Shazam's dominance in music identification - quite literally as surface level as it gets.

 

[siddavis]

The EU rightly does this all the time, and it is about protecting their citizens from US companies

No, this is just more centralized government control. They are sticking their noses where it doesn’t belong and convincing people it is for their own “protection”. Sad thing is, people subvert their own will and control willingly more and more.

 

[ronntaylor]

WTF took them to so long in throwing out this roadblock? More than five months after Apple announced the acquisition? And there will be a delay of at least 90 days. If there was that much concern the EU should've voiced it sooner.

 

[asiga]

Somebody at Apple realized that storing the list of the music listened by users could bring money. It’s all “let’s milk the user” these days (and users agree to give their lives for free to Google, Apple, Facebook, or whatever corporate)

 

[chucker23n1]

WTF took them to so long in throwing out this roadblock? More than five months after Apple announced the acquisition? And there will be a delay of at least 90 days. If there was that much concern the EU should've voiced it sooner.

Acquisitions often take a year or two to pass antitrust regulatory checks. This is nothing unusual.