Slashdot Mirror
Spotify Files Complaint Against Apple With the European Commission Over 30% Tax and Restrictive Rules (spotify.com)
Spotify today filed a complaint with EU antitrust regulators against Apple, saying the iPhone maker unfairly limits rivals to its own Apple Music streaming service. Spotify CEO Daniel Ek writes in a blog post: In recent years, Apple has introduced rules to the App Store that purposely limit choice and stifle innovation at the expense of the user experience -- essentially acting as both a player and referee to deliberately disadvantage other app developers. After trying unsuccessfully to resolve the issues directly with Apple, we're now requesting that the EC take action to ensure fair competition. Apple operates a platform that, for over a billion people around the world, is the gateway to the internet. Apple is both the owner of the iOS platform and the App Store -- and a competitor to services like Spotify. In theory, this is fine. But in Apple's case, they continue to give themselves an unfair advantage at every turn.
To illustrate what I mean, let me share a few examples. Apple requires that Spotify and other digital services pay a 30% tax on purchases made through Apple's payment system, including upgrading from our Free to our Premium service. If we pay this tax, it would force us to artificially inflate the price of our Premium membership well above the price of Apple Music. And to keep our price competitive for our customers, that isn't something we can do. As an alternative, if we choose not to use Apple's payment system, forgoing the charge, Apple then applies a series of technical and experience-limiting restrictions on Spotify.
For example, they limit our communication with our customers -- including our outreach beyond the app. In some cases, we aren't even allowed to send emails to our customers who use Apple. Apple also routinely blocks our experience-enhancing upgrades. Over time, this has included locking Spotify and other competitors out of Apple services such as Siri, HomePod, and Apple Watch. We aren't seeking special treatment. We simply want the same treatment as numerous other apps on the App Store, like Uber or Deliveroo, who aren't subject to the Apple tax and therefore don't have the same restrictions.
To illustrate what I mean, let me share a few examples. Apple requires that Spotify and other digital services pay a 30% tax on purchases made through Apple's payment system, including upgrading from our Free to our Premium service. If we pay this tax, it would force us to artificially inflate the price of our Premium membership well above the price of Apple Music. And to keep our price competitive for our customers, that isn't something we can do. As an alternative, if we choose not to use Apple's payment system, forgoing the charge, Apple then applies a series of technical and experience-limiting restrictions on Spotify.
For example, they limit our communication with our customers -- including our outreach beyond the app. In some cases, we aren't even allowed to send emails to our customers who use Apple. Apple also routinely blocks our experience-enhancing upgrades. Over time, this has included locking Spotify and other competitors out of Apple services such as Siri, HomePod, and Apple Watch. We aren't seeking special treatment. We simply want the same treatment as numerous other apps on the App Store, like Uber or Deliveroo, who aren't subject to the Apple tax and therefore don't have the same restrictions.
You didn't read the article.
The problem isn't doing a website and host your own payment platform for your service, but it is that Apple prevents any company from contacting their own customers about payment options that are not linked to Apple.
Even if you create a Free Spotify account, on another platform, use it on your iDevice, then Apple can tell you that you have breached the developer terms of service if you contact them with an email saying they could upgrade to premium on your website.
The margins in this business are thin, and honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple made more money from the 30% tax (all expenses accounted for) than Spotify providing the actual service. And that's with Apple providing their own competing service too which isn't limited to those ridiculous rules (and honestly would be surprising if they made a profit too, but that's not an issue for Apple to operate this at loss anyway).
include payments to the people who wrote and played the songs? Spotify, being yet another business that doesn't want to pay for the music, really should shut up about this. At least Apple pays something that isn't so meager as to be an insult.
Republican leadership = Idiocracy
Apple makes a phone and sells music services on it.
Spotify could make a phone and sell music services on it too. But instead, it wants to JUST sell its music services, and ride on the coattails of someone else who bothers to make the hardware to make that possible.
On a related note...Spotify of course doesn't make the music either. It is just a middle man. It wants to connector creators and consumers, and charge a Spotify tax to SOMEBODY (either users who pay, or advertise), to make use of its marketplace. Sound familiar?
Microsoft makes an operating system and gives away a web browser with it. Netscape could make a computer operating system and give away web browsers too. But instead, it wants to JUST give away its web browser, and ride on the coattails of someone else who bothers to make the operating system to make that possible...
On a related note.... Netscape of course doesn't make the websites either. It is just a middle man...
Sound familiar?
Show me on the 1st Amendment bobblehead where the moderator touched you...