That's not the issue. A retail store has also became a competitor in this case. They sell at wholesale
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
FTC Looking Into App Store Rules Regarding Subscription Services
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's not the issue. A retail store has also became a competitor in this case. They sell at wholesale
The government needs to stay out of it and let the free market sort this stuff out TBQH. I hate when the government gets involved in picking winners and losers with the interpretation of the law. Apple's 30% cut is standard retail practice. The maintenance of such a HUGE app ecosystem alone is a HUGE expensive undertaking. The 30% covers the cost and offers Apple what is at best a slightly above break-even proposition. Apple has not done anything wrong to Spotify other than offer up more competition in the music streaming market seeing as Spotify's efforts to get users to stream their music have been unprofitable for pretty much everyone involved.
I asked for examples of all these people getting rich from the App Store as the other user posted. I think it's a fair question.
That happens everyone. Duane Reade has it's own brands of things also of some of the same things other vendors are offering. That's not unusual.That's not the issue. A retail store has also became a competitor in this case. They sell at wholesale
Here we go again...
Money hungry government going after Apple's money.
The 30% is for all the development tools, advertisement, AppStore, etc. expenses Apple is incurring and passing on the savings to the developers.
Money hungry government going after Apple's money.
The 30% is for all the development tools, advertisement, AppStore, etc. expenses Apple is incurring and passing on the savings to the developers.
Clearly not Apple. The 30% they can get from the few vendors who offer up paid apps is barely a little more than subsidizing everyone else's free apps on the app store. If the government wants to create a law specifically for this use case they should do that. Otherwise it's just judicial activism. They are going outside the laws that are on the books to create whole new laws based on their feelings. The constitution should be broadly interpreted as it is designed to be broadly interpreted but anti-trust law should not be broadly interpreted.
The government is looking into the claims being made. I missed the part where they have made new laws regarding Apple because of Spotify.
They shouldn't be looking into anything. Apple isn't doing anything differently than they did before other than now they have a music app with streaming. Everything else is still the same as it relates to other vendors. The article clearly states at least some of the FTC thinks the 30% cut that has been in existence since the app store itself is an anti trust violation.
i am surprised the EU hasnt been up their ass about this yet.
as a customer i welcome this
as a customer i welcome this
Some of you "Leave Apple Alone!!!" folks need to read the source article. The FTC is just looking into the issue, not even opening a formal investigation at this point. The article also has reactions from lawyers specializing on antitrust law; several of whom support your own p.o.v.
" folks need to read the source article. The FTC is just looking into the issue, not even opening a formal investigation at this point. The article also has reactions from lawyers specializing on antitrust law; several of whom support your own p.o.v.
Of course they should take a look at it if someone complained. You do realize that there is no investigation at this point and there may not be one?
If Apple allowed their App Store monopoly to have an alternative non Apple marketplace to operate, maybe your comment wouldn't sound as stupid.
But who didn't see this coming? Many here in the peanut gallery were saying this would happen.
Some of you "Leave Apple Alone!!!
It's comical, isn't it? You'd think people were having their family insulted.
those who are saying "fine, then don't put your app on the appstore"...
thats terrible
what the hell are we going to do if suddenly all the biggest, popular apps are no longer available on our devices?
do you WANT apple to be blackberry?
thats terrible
what the hell are we going to do if suddenly all the biggest, popular apps are no longer available on our devices?
do you WANT apple to be blackberry?
The free market was working out all the kinks but now that the government is prematurely getting involved in any way at all, it automatically supersedes anything the free market was doing on it's own. This is premature. You don't need to investigate every claim. Apple is one of the most sued company's on the planet. Everything is not a case particularly as it relates to a standing policy that's been in effect for several years now.
That's a good point, especially as Spotify is a Euro company. Probably because Apple Music is so new. It takes things a while to get going there, but once they get rolling, they're relentless (as Google has been experiencing on several fronts).
If there is a report of wrong doing, it's looked at. There may be no investigation at all. Of course if it was Samsung, Google or Microsoft, the government couldn't get involved quick enough.
Apple had very helping hand in Spotify's success. They had code and app quality controls. They supplied the marketing and infrastructure etc... even gave them prime spots on the app store. Hell Apple Music coming out made people reconsider the Spotify app all over again to the point that it has gotten more downloads now than at any other time since it's release.
The PR alone is bad for Apple. So Apple already looks like the bad guy just because the FTC is "looking into" the claim before Apple Music has even been out or Apple having collected a dime from it. If Spotify is looking for damages, what damages would you get? Spotify is getting more people to check out the app than ever before. Spotify is not making streaming profitable on it's own. Artists have publicly complained about Spotify devaluing their own work.
Last edited:
Don't you also mean that Apple files a lot of lawsuits against competitors? I know, any claim against Apple should be ignored.
The "free market" has ALWAYS been a government created and regulated entity. Without government intervention and control the supposed free-market would never exist. People need to stop listening to their favorite half wit political commentators and teach themselves the basics of economics before posting about things they do not understand.
Haha, are you unintentionally quoting the old New Yorker cartoon in which Marx on Prozac says, "Sure! Capitalism can work out its kinks!"?
I think Apple invented fire and the wheel too.
I dont mean it directly to the spotify issue directly.
just the in General reactionary comments by half this thread so far saying "if you don't like their terms go elsehwere"
yes, they're right. If you don't like Apple's terms go elsewhere.
But do they not realize that if enough people are tired with the split, and theres enough people who can't compete with Apple because of it, that they will stop supplying their Applications to the App store.
thats terrible. it means the App store will start slowly losing the top apps, and possibly start loosing what makes the App store so great.
business isn't always about dominating your supply channel, but working with them. if enough App developers realize they're not happy, man, it would suck.
Entering a market isn't wrong doing. You don't look into something if you don't think anything is there on its face....especially at this early stage. If Apple had done something later down the line that was questionable then maybe you "look into" it. However, that is not the case here. People complaining about a 30% cut they were happy to pay to get access to the higher value customers.