EU antitrust agency waiting on Apple's response to Spotify's complaints

European Commissioner for Competition Margrethe Vestager has asked Apple some questions, and is waiting to hear back before a decision is made about the investigation of Spotify's antitrust complaints in the EU.

"We are looking into that and we have been asking questions around in that market but of course also Apple themselves, for them to answer the allegations," said Vestager at a conference. "And when they come back, we will know more."

It is unclear when Apple will respond to the questions, nor when the European Commission is predicting to make a judgement. Apple has posted a large discussion about the App Store as it applies to competition and developers in response to the Spotify complaint, however.

Spotify alleges that Apple institutionally hampers third-party services that compete with products like Apple Music. Specifically, Spotify claims that the 30 percent cut on App Store purchases and a smaller one on subscriptions is anticompetitive. The music streamer also believes that Apple should more widely share data and technology with competitors.

Apple has said that the vast majority of developers — 84 percent — do not pay Apple when users download or run their apps. It also points out that apps that are free to download or earn revenue through advertising are not charged the 30 percent fee.

Subscriptions paid for outside of the app aren't assessed a charge, but Apple does restrict telling users that paying on a company's website is an option. Apple also doesn't assess a fee to companies that sell goods or services through an app.

7 Comments

jvmb 9 Years · 59 comments

About 5 years ago

I expected Spotify to file an antitrust suit against Apple for not allowing Spotify to work with HomePod and Apple Watch. Google and Amazon each have their own music service, but they allow me to use Spotify as the default for music on Google Assistant and Alexa devices.

mjtomlin 20 Years · 2690 comments

jvmb said:

I expected Spotify to file an antitrust suit against Apple for not allowing Spotify to work with HomePod and Apple Watch. Google and Amazon each have their own music service, but they allow me to use Spotify as the default for music on Google Assistant and Alexa devices.

Sorry but you can't dictate what features a product needs to support. That's why there's this thing called a free market - it allows OEMs to create and develop devices that they can sell to consumers and offer unique features/services that the consumer may or may not want. (And of course Google and Amazon let you use Spotify on their devices... Both of those companies are more interested in the data you provide when you talk to or use their "devices".)

Spotify's argument that Apple has an unfair advantage is true. Apple does. All OEMs have an unfair advantage when it comes to what is shipped (pre-installed) on their devices. And all 3rd party developers know this. It is their choice to make their app or service available on that platform/device. Apple pays the exact same fees Spotify does when they want their service or app on other platforms. Spotify wants a free ride on Apple's back. Period.

All developers know they have to pay a fee to Apple if they want their product or service on Apple's platform. It should not matter if Apple has a competing service or app. Apple should be allowed to take advantage of the fact that they created, developed and maintain that platform. That's one of the main reasons companies create these platforms. Apple is unique in that their devices are the first (and only) step onto that platform.

genovelle 16 Years · 1481 comments

jvmb said:

I expected Spotify to file an antitrust suit against Apple for not allowing Spotify to work with HomePod and Apple Watch. Google and Amazon each have their own music service, but they allow me to use Spotify as the default for music on Google Assistant and Alexa devices.

They allow it because they have an ulterior motive, the extraction of data to sell them something else. The devices are sold as a loss leader, so anything that helps them find out more about the client is helpful.

mjtomlin said:

jvmb said:

I expected Spotify to file an antitrust suit against Apple for not allowing Spotify to work with HomePod and Apple Watch. Google and Amazon each have their own music service, but they allow me to use Spotify as the default for music on Google Assistant and Alexa devices.

Sorry but you can't dictate what features a product needs to support. That's why there's this thing called a free market - it allows OEMs to create and develop devices that they can sell to consumers and offer unique features/services that the consumer may or may not want. (And of course Google and Amazon let you use Spotify on their devices... Both of those companies are more interested in the data you provide when you talk to or use their "devices".)

Spotify's argument that Apple has an unfair advantage is true. Apple does. All OEMs have an unfair advantage when it comes to what is shipped (pre-installed) on their devices. And all 3rd party developers know this. It is their choice to make their app or service available on that platform/device. Apple pays the exact same fees Spotify does when they want their service or app on other platforms. Spotify wants a free ride on Apple's back. Period.

All developers know they have to pay a fee to Apple if they want their product or service on Apple's platform. It should not matter if Apple has a competing service or app. Apple should be allowed to take advantage of the fact that they created, developed and maintain that platform. That's one of the main reasons companies create these platforms. Apple is unique in that their devices are the first (and only) step onto that platform.

True. Keep in mind. Apple would prefer not to be the primary software provider on their platform. They do so out of necessity. When they have depended on others to provide key services, they ended up with partners turned competitors. Starting with Microsoft with Word and Excell which ended up creating what is now Windows and nearly killing them, to Google with Mobile Maps that ended up being used as a weapon to increase the value of Android, by holding back features like turn by turn navigation for years.

They have finally learned their lesson. At the same time they are willing to dive in an create software like Aperture when it makes sense, but if much better solutions come along the will bow out of it fits their future goals. In this case they later introduced plugins for iOS that allow their base app to work with what adobe had. They also can add those features directly if needed now that photos on their platforms is reaching feature parity and will be cross platform compatible on Apple devices.