Spotify and Apple Again Clash Over App Store Rules and Fees

[Sogeman]

Bad

If Apple designed and built a shopping mall, should vendors expect to be able to set up shop in that mall rent-free? Despite Apple being on the hook for maintenance, security, insurance, etc?

Bad comparison. They pay 'rent' it's 99 per year. This would be like shops having to give the mall a percentage of every sale

 

[peterdev]

Bad

Bad comparison. They pay 'rent' it's 99 per year. This would be like shops having to give the mall a percentage of every sale

Not sure how it is in the US, but here in the UK shops do give the mall a percentage of every sale, on top of the rent.

 

[mrgrdn]

It would be advisable to steer clear of Spotify, as its founder has invested in military technology. Helsing intends to utilize their AI to enhance enemy reconnaissance. They are developing software capable of identifying patterns within data from cameras, thermal imaging, and other sensors. So it seems, it is better to fight than to give money to the artist

 

[RickDEGH]

I don't see why Spotify has to pay anything to Apple here. I pay Apple for my device and my services.

No, you pay a one-time fee for the device. That device functions because of all the software, updates, inter-connected services, etc. Someone (Apple) has to make sure of that. That’s why they have to fight to make sure of this, while making sure their business survives. They’re a for-profit entity after all.

 

[svish]

Seems never ending. Waiting to see what happens in this case. Will not be surprised to hear that Spotify is raising prices again.

 

[SanderEvers]

The DMA is not against the fee that Apple requests from developers for publishing an app onto the App Store. Or against the fee they request for in-app purchases. The DMA only says that Apple can't require developers to use Apple's iApp program and Apple must allow links to external websites.

So yeah, Apple is in their right here. Spotify can also just offer their App using a third party App Store or directly from their website (with 17.5)

 

[wanha]

If Spotify want to cut Apple out completely, the solution is so simple: they just need to redirect their users to a web app.

But they won't do that, because they want to benefit from all the cool stuff that comes along with using Apple's proprietary platform.

As the article says, "Spotify does not currently pay Apple any money, and it does not want to."

Personally, I think artists should start applying the same logic to Spotify - they should be allowed to distribute their music for free on Spotify's platform.

 

[gmiller744]

Apple's "compliance" with the EU law was never actually compliant, and it's going to cost them even more money in the end. Their new terms and conditions are just further abuse of their monopolistic position, and while the US has been happy to give corporations unlimited power to abuse consumers, the EU isn't yet so corrupt.

Spotify will win this in the end, because the EU law is actually on their side.

 

[ackmondual]

If Apple trades in the EU should they just pay their taxes instead of fighting in court for years?

When Apple does it... "you gotta play by their rules".
When a country that Apple operates does it... "Apple shouldn't be subject to their laws!"

 

[brofkand]

Spotify wants to profit off of Apples services backend and customer base without paying. The real world doesn't work that way and Spotify needs to either pay or remove themselves from Apple services.

I’m sure Spotify would be happy to host their app on their own server so it wouldn’t cost Apple anything at all. It’s Apple that forces the store on everyone

 

[Abazigal]

Apple's "compliance" with the EU law was never actually compliant, and it's going to cost them even more money in the end. Their new terms and conditions are just further abuse of their monopolistic position, and while the US has been happy to give corporations unlimited power to abuse consumers, the EU isn't yet so corrupt.

Spotify will win this in the end, because the EU law is actually on their side.

Agreed.

They should just rename the DMA as the “Spotify Boost Act” at this point, given how vocal Spotify has been. It’s painfully obvious who the key beneficiary of this law was right from the very start.

 

[danpaulll]

If Apple designed and built a shopping mall, should vendors expect to be able to set up shop in that mall rent-free? Despite Apple being on the hook for maintenance, security, insurance, etc?

This hypothetical comparisons are so strange to me, because if we go by this logic than apple could have designed and built anything.

What if Apple designed and built a public square where everyone had a spot to sell whatever they wanted for free and then they get rewarded by people always being in their neighborhood?
What if apple set up a charity shop where not only the spot is for free but they would pay vendors to be there?

 

[Mescagnus]

A reminder of what is happening on Spotify and the contribution to the biggest wave of gun violence in Europe

Swedish criminal gangs using fake Spotify streams to launder money

Investigation claims networks convert illicit cash to bitcoin to pay people who sell false streams on the platform

www.theguardian.com

Multiple criminal gang members confirm they’ve used Spotify for money laundering in bombshell new report in Sweden - Music Business Worldwide

An explosive new report from Svenska Dagbladet in Sweden focuses on the end purpose of streaming fraud on Spotify for organized criminals: laundering money.

www.musicbusinessworldwide.com

So the question is…why is everyone currently fighting Apple so badly tainted by crime, corruption and harming society?

Perhaps this in part explains why Spotify would like all transactions & money fly under the radar – you know, not being tracked by any third party such as Apple.

 

[Mescagnus]

Agreed.

They should just rename the DMA as the “Spotify Boost Act” at this point, given how vocal Spotify has been. It’s painfully obvious who the key beneficiary of this law was right from the very start.

This points to possible corruption within the EU parliament & law makers, which should be investigated.

 

[Antoniosmalakia]

Verizon doesn’t develop the tools and APIs Spotify uses to build its app, Apple does. Without those tools and APIs the Spotify app couldn’t exist. It costs Apple a lot of money to design, develop, and maintain those APIs. Apple doesn’t think companies like Spotify should get to use the tools Apple creates for free. Spotify thinks they should be able to force Apple to give them those tools without paying anything. Spotify is wrong.

But aren't developers, including Spotify, actually having to pay a yearly fee to access those Apple developed tools and APIs in the first place? (the answer to that is yes, by the way).

 

[AlmightyKang]

Lets talk about Spotify for a moment. They are in serious financial difficulties. They have never been profitable and are trying to increase margins as much as possible for the investors only to cut losses. At no point do they give a crap about the customers, the artists or the product or this legislation past turning it into cash. Their entire business is failing. This is the death rattle of them spending their capital on lawyers to try and break a whole regulatory market so their lie can live a little longer.

Also lets remember how Spotify started. They used to offer free streaming to get people hooked to their service. They DID NOT license most of the music on it and ended up forcing labels to come to a profit sharing agreement later after they broke all the other markets. Instead of doing this for two of the labels, mentioned later, they came to a profit sharing agreement with big media companies who make money when someone else's label gets a listen. They then pay the artists the lowest per stream.

Just remember: at no point is Spotify there for you the customer. You are a source of milk and nothing else.

Some info, from SEC filings a couple of years back, Spotify's ownership is about 30% the two founders, nearly 10% is Tencent (chinese megacorp), another 25% is shared across various large investment companies (Morgan Stanley included), and Sony and UMG own about 7% and the rest is smaller investors. These people want their money back at any cost.

 

[Abazigal]

But aren't developers, including Spotify, actually having to pay a yearly fee to access those Apple developed tools and APIs in the first place? (the answer to that is yes, by the way).

The question then is - do you consider $99 a year enough to cover everything, or is it more of an entrance fee so the people actually signing up for a developer account are legitimate ones.

 

[Volk.JP]

If Apple designed and built a shopping mall, should vendors expect to be able to set up shop in that mall rent-free? Despite Apple being on the hook for maintenance, security, insurance, etc?

Should vendors also expect to pay 30% of every item they sell on top of that mall’s rent? Or should they expect a 27% fee if they tell a customer “We also have a shop next street, you can buy it cheaper there”?

 

[Abazigal]

This points to possible corruption within the EU parliament & law makers, which should be investigated.

Protectionism isn’t illegal.

It doesn’t mean we shouldn’t recognise it when it is happening either.

 

[purplerainpurplerain]

Perhaps this in part explains why Spotify would like all transactions & money fly under the radar – you know, not being tracked by any third party such as Apple.

It’s not a surprise to see everyone railing against Apple are really into crimes, crypto scams, being owned by competition like Tencent, running spy ops on users, or like many EU/UK politicians getting bribes via anonymous sources in the UAE.

 

[Aoligei]

You are not forced to use an Apple product. If one feels it's a better experience on Android while also saving 30% on a subscription then switch. Consumers have choices. There's a price-point for everyone.

Exactly. This is why I use subscription services on Android or paying developer on website.

I have never once subscribed via iOS App Store.

 

[Abazigal]

A reminder of what is happening on Spotify and the contribution to the biggest wave of gun violence in Europe

Swedish criminal gangs using fake Spotify streams to launder money

Investigation claims networks convert illicit cash to bitcoin to pay people who sell false streams on the platform

www.theguardian.com

Multiple criminal gang members confirm they’ve used Spotify for money laundering in bombshell new report in Sweden - Music Business Worldwide

An explosive new report from Svenska Dagbladet in Sweden focuses on the end purpose of streaming fraud on Spotify for organized criminals: laundering money.

www.musicbusinessworldwide.com

So the question is…why is everyone currently fighting Apple so badly tainted by crime, corruption and harming society?

The problem lies in assuming that Spotify (or any other company fighting Apple) is automatically the good guy in this equation.

 

[Rogifan]

It is my opinion that the App Store does play a role in facilitating a transaction between the company and the consumer. Apple put in a lot of effort in getting users to trust in the safety and security of the App Store. They make it easy to pay using iTunes and biometrics and convenient to create a new account via Sign in with Apple.

I am not sure how relevant that still is today. I guess we could debate till the cows come home as to what a reasonable cut entails, but the point is that Apple does deserve something over and above that users have already paid for their hardware.

Ok but that’s a different argument than Apple is the reason for someone’s success. Also if this was so important than why does Apple allow Spotify and Netflix to bypass their IAP system altogether? The fact that you can’t purchase an e-book inside the Kindle app (because Amazon rightly doesn’t believe it should give 30% of that sale to Apple) is just user hostile. Forcing someone out to the web to complete a transaction that could happen inside the app is also user hostile. Also if you read the press release Apple put out regarding Spotify it’s quite clear that Apple believes the only reason Spotify is successful is because of Apple. I think that’s ludicrous.

As I said in a previous comment Apple should modify IAP commission to only apply to games. For other apps that want to use IAP charge them a smaller fee to cover the payment processing and support.

According to Forbes global e-commerce is expected to total over $6T in 2024. Apple’s IAP is a small fraction of that.

35 Top E-Commerce Statistics

If you’re looking for a way to boost your sales and take your business to new heights, e-commerce should be on your radar. By pairing a strong web presence with the latest e-commerce platforms, you can broaden your offerings, increase your reach and remain open 24/7. These top e-commerce statistics

www.forbes.com

 

[vipergts2207]

The problem lies in assuming that Spotify (or any other company fighting Apple) is automatically the good guy in this equation.

Nobody should assume any for-profit corporation is a good guy. They’re all there to hoover up as much money from consumers’ wallets as possible. The end. Coincidentally, Apple is one of the best at it.

 

[AlmightyKang]

Nobody should assume any for-profit corporation is a good guy. They’re all there to hoover up as much money from consumers wallets as possible. The end. Coincidentally, Apple is one of the best at it.

I suspect we're all well aware of that. It's just one that actually gives a return on investment.

The idea of good and bad when it comes to corporations is overexplained. It's a mutual parasitic existence.