Spotify, others file EU complaint over Apple and Google app store practices
Apple and Google are being targeted by a host of European internet services firms, including streaming music leader Spotify, that are urging the European Commission to investigate the tech giants over "troubling" app store practices.
Spotify co-founder and CEO Daniel Ek. | Source: Spotify
In a letter sent to the European Union's antitrust body, the chief executives of Spotify, streaming music firm Deezer, startup investor Rocket Internet and other Europe-based companies claim dominant internet platforms "can and do abuse their privileged position," reports the Financial Times.
The European companies complain some mobile operating systems, app stores and search engines abuse their commanding marketshare to act as "gatekeepers" to consumer choice, thus impeding segment rivals attempting to market products that compete with first-party services, the letter says.
While not named in the letter, Apple and Google are clearly targets of the complaint. Together, Apple's iOS and Google's Android control more than 90 percent of the mobile operating system market and maintain a set of terms and conditions that third-party apps must follow in order to market their wares on the respective app stores.
In particular, internet companies argue they are not able to access analytics data when customers sign up for service through app store portals. Further, app store owners allegedly promote their own products ahead of third-party offerings. For example, Apple often publishes App Store banners advertising Apple Music, a competitor to Spotify and Deezer.
The letter arrives as the commission considers a drastic overhaul of its digital policy. Among the topics of debate are allegedly unfair contracts mandated by dominant platforms. The antitrust institution is mulling the creation of an independent settlement body that would be tasked with settling disputes between large entities and smaller businesses.
Addressing the discrepancy, CEOs write that common competition law is too costly and onerous, and therefore not applicable to small internet companies. Instead, a "specific rules guiding the interactions between platforms and their business users" is needed, the letter says.
Today's letter is Spotify's latest attack against Apple in a seemingly endless war over streaming music supremacy. Last year, Spotify accused Apple of engaging in anti-competitive practices when a version of Spotify's iOS app was rejected from the App Store. At issue was Apple's customary 30-percent cut of all App Store revenue, which applies to in-app purchases like service subscriptions.
To offset Apple's take, Spotify prices its subscription tier at $13 per month when users sign up through the iOS app, a $3 premium over the $10 users pay when registering through the web. Spotify views the 30-percent cut as "a weapon to harm competitors," noting the terms allow Apple to sell its own Apple Music service for $10 per month.
Spotify co-founder and CEO Daniel Ek. | Source: Spotify
In a letter sent to the European Union's antitrust body, the chief executives of Spotify, streaming music firm Deezer, startup investor Rocket Internet and other Europe-based companies claim dominant internet platforms "can and do abuse their privileged position," reports the Financial Times.
The European companies complain some mobile operating systems, app stores and search engines abuse their commanding marketshare to act as "gatekeepers" to consumer choice, thus impeding segment rivals attempting to market products that compete with first-party services, the letter says.
While not named in the letter, Apple and Google are clearly targets of the complaint. Together, Apple's iOS and Google's Android control more than 90 percent of the mobile operating system market and maintain a set of terms and conditions that third-party apps must follow in order to market their wares on the respective app stores.
In particular, internet companies argue they are not able to access analytics data when customers sign up for service through app store portals. Further, app store owners allegedly promote their own products ahead of third-party offerings. For example, Apple often publishes App Store banners advertising Apple Music, a competitor to Spotify and Deezer.
The letter arrives as the commission considers a drastic overhaul of its digital policy. Among the topics of debate are allegedly unfair contracts mandated by dominant platforms. The antitrust institution is mulling the creation of an independent settlement body that would be tasked with settling disputes between large entities and smaller businesses.
Addressing the discrepancy, CEOs write that common competition law is too costly and onerous, and therefore not applicable to small internet companies. Instead, a "specific rules guiding the interactions between platforms and their business users" is needed, the letter says.
Today's letter is Spotify's latest attack against Apple in a seemingly endless war over streaming music supremacy. Last year, Spotify accused Apple of engaging in anti-competitive practices when a version of Spotify's iOS app was rejected from the App Store. At issue was Apple's customary 30-percent cut of all App Store revenue, which applies to in-app purchases like service subscriptions.
To offset Apple's take, Spotify prices its subscription tier at $13 per month when users sign up through the iOS app, a $3 premium over the $10 users pay when registering through the web. Spotify views the 30-percent cut as "a weapon to harm competitors," noting the terms allow Apple to sell its own Apple Music service for $10 per month.
Comments
All these guys do is cry.
It's not their fault Spotify is known for crying and wanting free stuff.
First of all, even though Apple and Google control over 95% of the World mobile OS market, Apple iOS only account for about 18% of the World market. Google Android has the other 80%. Therefore, the Apple App Store is not a dominate player. Maybe in the US, where iOS is on about 40% of the devices but surely not in Europe. Plus iOS users can subscribe to Spotify through a web browser. It's not as though iOS users can't subscribe to Spotify at all. So it can't be that great of a loss for Spotify because they don't want to put an app in the Apple App Store and pay the commission.
Second of all, even though Google control over of the 80% World mobile OS market, Android is "open". Thus one don't have to go through the Google Play Store to install an app into Android. For sure Google have made it so there are advantages to go through the Google Play Store, but it will cost you if you're going to make money on the app.
Third of all, Apple and Google built, maintain and own their stores. Do BestBuy allow Walmart to advertise their electronics sales, inside BB stores? When I shop at Lucky's, whenever a name brand item goes on sale, Lucky's own store brand also goes on sale and the store brand item is right next to the name brand item. The same as when I shop in Amazon. Amazon will advertise items from their own store, when I'm looking at items from a store in their Marketplace. The business model of a digital store is not that much different from that of a brick and mortar store.
Fourth of all, Google main (and really only) money making business model is based on collecting analytical data from the people using their products, which most of the time is given away for free and using it to sell targeted advertising. If Spofify want to advertise to a target audience, they can pay Google to do it for them. Google don't have to let someone else collect that data, while in their store and thereby ending up not needing to pay Google for targeted ads. Do movie theaters let you bring in your own popcorn, thus not needing to buy it from the concession stand? The theater concession stand is where theaters makes most of their profits. Most of the revenue from ticket sales goes to pay for the license to show the movie. Spotify basically wants be allowed to bring in their own popcorn, into Google's theater.
Think a bit huh little light. You sought a fucking Apple forum to say this non sequitur crap.. IF anyone's a "warrior" IT IS YOU..
Guess every damn luxury store should just allow anyone to use their premise to sell their shit.
Why not give access to their client list to... No value in this at all....
That's how it should be hey in your little deluded world.
You? I only can imagine you are typing in cheap android phone?
At this point as long as they are not blocked access to the market place it all comes down to who has the better product.
Of course Apple has an "unfair" advantage... they make the hardware and the software that these services run on. People like to compare Android and Windows with Apple's products, but they are not the same. First of all, Apple's platforms are a fraction of the others. Second, Apple makes the entire product. Google and Microsoft take unfair advantage of the fact that a majority of OEMs chose to use their OS/platform, making them market "leaders". That's a huge difference from what Apple does.
Also, it's only natural that growth rate will drop when a competing service enters the market.
Why do you think Apple's is being anti-competitive?