EU Prepares to Charge Apple in Antitrust Dispute With Spotify

[MacRumors]

EU regulators are in the process of finalizing a charge sheet against Apple, initiated by an antitrust complaint from Spotify (via Reuters).

In 2019, Spotify filed a complaint with the European Commission, alleging that Apple enforces App Store rules that "purposely limit choice and stifle innovation at the expense of the user experience," accusing the company of "acting as both a player and referee to deliberately disadvantage other app developers."

In particular, Spotify highlighted that Apple's 30 percent commission on App Store purchases, including in-app subscriptions, forces the music streaming service to charge existing subscribers $12.99 per month for its Premium plan on the App Store, just to collect the $9.99 per month it usually charges.

It is proposed that this gives Apple an "unfair advantage," since Spotify is unable to fairly compete with Apple Music's standard $9.99 per month price within the ‌App Store‌. If Spotify chooses not to collect payments via the ‌App Store‌, Apple purportedly "applies a series of technical and experience-limiting restrictions" on the company. It is also said that Apple was "locking Spotify and other competitors out of Apple services such as Siri, HomePod, and Apple Watch," thereby making Apple Music a more attractive option for subscribers.

In what appears to be a significant advancement in the antitrust case, Apple looks to be hit with charges by the European Commission, suggesting that the company has likely been found to have conducted itself anti-competitively and violated the EU's antitrust rules. The EU is now actively preparing a charge sheet against Apple, according to sources speaking to Reuters, which may be sent to the company before the summer.

The Spotify antitrust case is one of several opened by the European Commission into Apple's business practices last year in June last year, including similar cases from the likes of Kobo-owner Rakuten. It is not yet known what exactly the EU's charges could involve, but it has been suggested that Apple could be forced to pay a fine or make changes to its App Store business model in Europe to foster greater competition.

Article Link: EU Prepares to Charge Apple in Antitrust Dispute With Spotify

 

[calzon65]

I wish Apple allowed an alternative to load applications on IOS (not developer mode). Yes, this could expose users to malicious applications that could cause them harm, but users could still chose to only load applications from the Apple store. We can load any application we want on MacOS, Windows or Linux, ... just not IOS.

 

[ForkHandles]

It’s great that we have institutions who can investigate practices of large corporations.

 

[5232152]

It's a fair complaint. With Apple having their own music streaming service has no reason to treat Spotify fairly. I don't know what the end result would logically look like but there is definitely a conflict of interest in the current setup.

 

[TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️]

I don't think Apple has to worry about Spotify.

 

[Appleman3546]

There are so many investigations and lawsuits against Apple for their app store, I think it is time for Apple to come up with a plan b in iOS 15...

 

[tevion5]

It’s great that we have institutions who can investigate practices of large corporations.

Yep I'm a big Apple fan but it's good they're kept in check from becoming 1999 Microsoft.
Better for consumers to have the options of Apple Music on a PS5 or Spotify on a HomePod with fair pricing competition.

 

[827538]

I do think there's merit to this. Users should be able to seamlessly integrate other music apps like Spotify as well as Apple does with their app. I'm currently getting a free Pandora premium account and it sucks on the Apple Watch and on HomePod you have to finish every request with "... on pandora".

Spotify should just require subscription signups on its website, isn't this what Netflix and Disney+ do?

 

[hasanahmad]

Simple solution . Apple should have a warning for a user every time an app is installed outside of its App Store that installing the app removes any responsibility on Apple to provide a secure device for the user. Also , any app which side loads is no longer allowed to use its App Store and services. Aka it’s on its own and user is responsible for any security issues

 

[swingerofbirch]

They'd actually have to charge $14.27 to get $9.99 after the 30% cut if my 6th grade math education holds up.

0.7x=9.99
x=14.27

 

[mattspace]

"but iOS isn't the majority of the smartphone market, how can they be charged with antitrust abuse of monopoly power, when they're only a minority player - Spotify should just go to Android if they don't agree to Apple's terms, because Apple made the iOS market and they set the rules"

welcome to "competition policy doesn't work the way you think it does".

 

[munpip214]

How do we know that Apple doesn’t collect 30% on their own subscriptions?

 

[grantew1]

I don't think Apple has to worry about Spotify.

Spotify is already eating apple's lunch in the music space.

Spotify Poised to Surpass Apple Podcasts in U.S. Listeners This Year

Spotify has been making inroads in the podcasting market over the course of the last few years, ramping up its original podcast offerings and making major acquisitions like Gimlet Media, Parcast, and Anchor, as well as scoring key deals such as the rights to the popular Joe Rogan Experience...

forums.macrumors.com

 

[SD449]

Do we know for sure Apple Music doesn’t pay 30% to Apple inc?

As others have said, if you don’t like it have sign up online only.

I said in another thread the AppStores success is the simplicity and easy of use. Spotify just wants to have its cake and eat it

 

[SD449]

How do we know that Apple doesn’t collect 30% on their own subscriptions?

Beat me too it

 

[djcerla]

I can buy an eBook on Amazon, and read it on my iPad Kindle one instant later. No Apple-Tax.

I subscribed to one year of Babbel on their website. No Apple tax, Babbel working great on my iPad.

Why can’t Spotify do the same?

If you want a platform, go build your own, like Apple did betting the house on the iPhone.

 

[Wildkraut]

POW! That's slap number 2, more to follow...
Go Arizona go America first!

/EU

 

[Michael Scrip]

Spotify is already eating apple's lunch in the music space.

Spotify Poised to Surpass Apple Podcasts in U.S. Listeners This Year

Spotify has been making inroads in the podcasting market over the course of the last few years, ramping up its original podcast offerings and making major acquisitions like Gimlet Media, Parcast, and Anchor, as well as scoring key deals such as the rights to the popular Joe Rogan Experience...

forums.macrumors.com

Then why is Spotify even worried?

If this case revolves around competition... Spotify is winning!

 

[hasanahmad]

Spotify is already eating apple's lunch in the music space.

Spotify Poised to Surpass Apple Podcasts in U.S. Listeners This Year

Spotify has been making inroads in the podcasting market over the course of the last few years, ramping up its original podcast offerings and making major acquisitions like Gimlet Media, Parcast, and Anchor, as well as scoring key deals such as the rights to the popular Joe Rogan Experience...

forums.macrumors.com

if anything, this makes the case FOR Apple not Spotify

 

[deevey]

I do think there's merit to this. Users should be able to seamlessly integrate other music apps like Spotify as well as Apple does with their app. I'm currently getting a free Pandora premium account and it sucks on the Apple Watch and on HomePod you have to finish every request with "... on pandora".

Spotify should just require subscription signups on its website, isn't this what Netflix and Disney+ do?

Yes they could, but the real money is in in-app signups and ongoing subscription fees otherwise advertising the offsite signup via traditional methods could cost a fortune.

Unlike Netflix and Disney, vs ATV the vast majority of music available is exactly the same on both platforms - which to be fair would seem to be in conflict seeing as the Apple signup is, and always will be in-app and they have no 30% fee's on their own apps.

 

[I7guy]

It's a good thing Apple has deep pockets and can stave off some this.

 

[SD449]

Spotify was in the AppStore paying 30% long before Apple Music launched at the same price, so I fail to understand what their issue what that is.

admittedly the issues with default music provider and HomePod support are somewhat valid but I cannot see why Apple requires to make it easy for them.

 

[Wildkraut]

Simple solution . Apple should have a warning for a user every time an app is installed outside of its App Store that installing the app removes any responsibility on Apple to provide a secure device for the user. Also , any app which side loads is no longer allowed to use its App Store and services. Aka it’s on its own and user is responsible for any security issues

Nothing against warning, depending of how its phrased.
Not anti-competitively phrased ☝️

 

[itsmeaustend]

I wish Apple allowed an alternative to load applications on IOS (not developer mode). Yes, this could expose users to malicious applications that could cause them harm, but users could still chose to only load applications from the Apple store. We can load any application we want on MacOS, Windows or Linux, ... just not IOS.

Get a computer if you want complete control. iOS is fine how it is.

As a developer I'm more inclined to support iOS because of how hard it is to pirate apps. If piracy was allowed on iOS (which is essentially what you're asking) then the only reason to support iOS is taken away.

and then I switch to being a web developer. Can't pirate webapps.

 

[jimbobb24]

Just require sign up outside the app.

These attacks discourage someone from building a good environment for apps. Why go to all that work if politicians will just come screw it up (an evergreen sentiment).

Besides being a walled garden the App Store also protests developers. It’s got a lot going for it.