3 ms·
It's an argument of rent-seeking vs rent-seeking. Apple technically has a right to a cut on all purchases made through their platform; however there may be a co
by synaesthesisx 8y ago
It's an argument of rent-seeking vs rent-seeking. Apple technically has a right to a cut on all purchases made through their platform; however there may be a conflict of interest in this case as they own one of the direct competitors to Spotify (Apple Music). Regardless, at the end of the day the artists are the ones that lose out on $$$ and are getting screwed.
- sjwright 8y agoThe difference is that everyone who interacts with the App Store platform does so knowingly and voluntarily. (And Apple adds value for developers and for consumers, which means it's not technically rent-seeking.) Whereas the artists who make music didn't do so with the intent of publishing on Spotify.
- ovao 8y agoUnless I misunderstand you, artists who own their music and don’t intend to be on Spotify aren’t on Spotify. When artists make the choice to sign the ownership or their music away to someone else, they face the potential consequences of that choice.
- sjwright 8y agoCorrect. I am, however, specifically talking about the music that is available on Spotify.