verne arase

Let's not kid ourselves … this is all about protecting Spotify.

Spotify has been tugging on mommy's sleeve for quite some time, and this is the EU/EC political response.

So … who is the EC protecting?

The EC has a long history of protecting EU consumers and EU companies … and that's all they seem to care about.

The artists who compose and make the music that Spotify is based on? They can go pound sand.

Spotify pays the lowest royalties in the business, and has actually sued the artists for asking for a bigger cut of the pie. So the content creators - the ones who make the music which is at the core of the streaming business - get no protection from those capitalizing on their work.

If they wanted to, the EC could come up with regulations to protect the artists and establish a minimum payment for steamed music back to the artists - but the EC doesn't care about them. They're just the creatives: the force behind the whole business.

As long as the consumers get cheap music and Spotify can distribute it at minimum wage, the EC is happy.

And that, my friends, is why the EU countries have dropped from the European Center of intellectual property development into an also ran block of bureaucratically connected counties.

There is no longer any respect for the rights of the creators.

You guys really need to take a look at Letric eBikes.

Cheaper with more features and foldable - a better package all around (and capable of up to 28 mph).

avon b7 said:
A perfectly valid option and nothing new. These kinds of fining systems have existed for years. The fines are both punitive and to deter.

Doesn't mean they're right or have legal jurisdiction outside their borders.

They have to right to revenues or actions taking place outside their borders - they're suffering from king of the world syndrome.

avon b7 said:
On the other hand, the US is banning companies worldwide from selling US origin technology (even small amounts) to Chinese purchasers if their products just happen to have any in the final product. Even if the technology is now not US. That is to say, the US company that created the technology was sold 100% to a non-US company. And in some cases, Chinese born scientists had a hand in creating those technologies but have gained US citizenship. 

rob53 said:

Interesting that a private company is required to tell a weird government agency how many customers it has. Do gas stations have to divulge this information? How about grocery stores?

I sure as hell hope they're just requesting figures for EU customers - the EU/EC has been getting too big for their britches lately, and has been threatening penalties based on a company's world-wide revenue - even though Apple isn't an EU headquartered company.

How the heck can a EU regulatory body threaten a foreign company's revenues earned outside their jurisdiction when they aren't even headquartered within the EU?