4 ms·

Let's assume neither Spotify or Apple have a crazy price advantage in the licensing of music. Spotify and Apple Music get to keep $6.99 of the $9.99 they charg

by berbec 8y ago

Let's assume neither Spotify or Apple have a crazy price advantage in the licensing of music. Spotify and Apple Music get to keep $6.99 of the $9.99 they charge users. They are both forced to pay $3.00 to Apple App Store. See how this helps Apple out a huge amount? One side has a 30% cut taken, the other has to deal with having their accounting made more complicated.

Benjammer 8y ago
I am in no way trying to deny that an advantage exists for Apple & Apple Music. Can you explain why that's a legal problem for them though?
- judge2020 8y ago
  The only legal problem I can see is because of the monopoly they have on their own hardware, but at that point, it's an antitrust case. I can't seem to find whatever Spotify is sending to the EU (from the bottom of the timeline [1]), but to me, it just seems like Spotify is whining throughout the whole website. The only thing I think Spotify could go with, if true, is this: > the rules are not applied evenly across the board. Does Uber pay it? No. Deliveroo? No. Does Apple Music pay it? No. So Apple gives the advantage to its own services. Disregarding "apple gives the advantage to its own services" while Uber and Deliveroo are not Apple-owned services, Apple not charging the commission for PassKit (Apple Pay) transactions may be the only thing Spotify has on Apple. 1: https://timetoplayfair.com/the-case/ https://timetoplayfair.com/the-case/
- berbec 8y ago
  I didn't know we were talking legality. The point raised above was "So what if they undercut Spotify, maybe Spotify should take 30% less profit when they sell using Apple channels?" I was trying to point out that it is economically unlikely Spotify has a 30%+ profit margin. Legal problem may exist in different areas. Ianal, but I wonder about Spotify's claims, refuted by Apple, about locking them out of watch and app store rejections. I am also interested in the practice not only requiring payemt though Apple, but banning any mention of other ways to purchase the same product.
  - Benjammer 8y ago
    >banning any mention of other ways to purchase the same product. What's the problem with this?

by berbec 8y ago

Benjammer 8y ago

I am in no way trying to deny that an advantage exists for Apple & Apple Music. Can you explain why that's a legal problem for them though?

judge2020 8y ago
The only legal problem I can see is because of the monopoly they have on their own hardware, but at that point, it's an antitrust case. I can't seem to find whatever Spotify is sending to the EU (from the bottom of the timeline [1]), but to me, it just seems like Spotify is whining throughout the whole website. The only thing I think Spotify could go with, if true, is this: > the rules are not applied evenly across the board. Does Uber pay it? No. Deliveroo? No. Does Apple Music pay it? No. So Apple gives the advantage to its own services. Disregarding "apple gives the advantage to its own services" while Uber and Deliveroo are not Apple-owned services, Apple not charging the commission for PassKit (Apple Pay) transactions may be the only thing Spotify has on Apple. 1: https://timetoplayfair.com/the-case/ https://timetoplayfair.com/the-case/
berbec 8y ago
I didn't know we were talking legality. The point raised above was "So what if they undercut Spotify, maybe Spotify should take 30% less profit when they sell using Apple channels?" I was trying to point out that it is economically unlikely Spotify has a 30%+ profit margin. Legal problem may exist in different areas. Ianal, but I wonder about Spotify's claims, refuted by Apple, about locking them out of watch and app store rejections. I am also interested in the practice not only requiring payemt though Apple, but banning any mention of other ways to purchase the same product.
- Benjammer 8y ago
  >banning any mention of other ways to purchase the same product. What's the problem with this?