To access the internet, billions of people have to rely on Apple and a small number of other platforms. It’s become a significant problem that harms consumers by limiting choice and access to lower-cost options. It also chokes the growth of the tech sector, and lawmakers, consumer groups and others are taking action around the world.
If these harmful behaviors are left unchecked, it will be a far more serious and extensive issue in the future. We can’t collectively sit by and hope this all works out. This is not just about Spotify vs. Apple. It’s much bigger than that—the future of the entire internet is at stake.
That’s why it’s a promising sign that government officials in India, Japan, Spain and South Korea—and more to come!—are currently working on laws and regulations to address Apple’s anticompetitive restrictions.
FAQs
-
How do Apple’s actions limit creativity and innovation?
No one more than Spotify loves a story about a scrappy start-up who believes so strongly in themselves and fights like crazy to make it—and then because of that commitment and hard work, is able to break through. That’s our story, and the one we hope countless others get to experience. But for this to happen, we need an entrepreneurial environment where companies that are just getting off the ground—the ones fighting for a shot—get a fair chance to succeed without being held back by arbitrary rules that raise their costs, make it harder to sign up for their services, and make it harder for customers to discover them. So it’s up to us to use our voice and work together against discriminatory conduct and abuse of market power. We also need to be able to rely on the laws that protect developers from this kind of bad behavior and hold gatekeepers accountable to support real and meaningful competition.
-
What’s changed since Spotify initially launched on the App Store?
What Spotify has experienced with Apple has been a classic “bait and switch.” Over time, Apple has unilaterally changed the rules multiple times and made it worse and worse for Spotify and other app developers—adding fees, stopping us from telling consumers about pricing and deals, and other restrictions that made it unfeasible for us to use Apple’s payment system, and much harder for us to communicate with our own users. The intensity of Apple’s restrictions started to change after Apple acquired a rival music streaming service and prepared to launch Apple Music, which was many years after Spotify brought music-streaming to fans around the world. Faced with established competitors like Spotify, Apple started to aggressively move the goalposts of compliance with App Store rules to disadvantage rivals like us in favor of their own services. When the Spotify app launched on Apple’s iOS, it was in a very different place than it is today. Apple has unilaterally changed the rules multiple times, especially after Apple launched Apple Music.
-
What choices does Spotify have today?
Apple’s anticompetitive behavior has forced us to choose between what really amounts to the lesser of two evils: not using Apple’s in-app payment system and not paying Apple the 30% tax, but then being subjected to Apple’s anti-steering provisions, which prohibit us from communicating with our customers. Unfortunately, this has created a less-than-awesome experience for our fans because it restricts you from upgrading to Premium on iOS. This makes it more challenging for you to get the audio content you want, the way you want it, and with the ease you expect from a company like Spotify.
-
Is Spotify trying to free-ride on Apple’s technology and investment in the App Store?
No. We don’t want a free ride, we just want a fair ride. Spotify already pays Apple a listing fee to be in the App Store. Paying a 30% commission for digital goods offered in-app is unnecessary. It’d be the equivalent of a magazine in a grocery store–imagine how unfair it would be if a magazine publisher paid that grocery store money in order to be seen by customers at the store, and also had to pay that grocery store a 30% cut every time a customer bought a subscription to that magazine. It’s untenable, especially because Apple is not providing developers like Spotify any services for taking a 30% commission. If Spotify were to accept Apple’s terms and pay the tax, it would force us to artificially inflate the price of our products, making our prices less competitive for our customers — and giving Apple’s products an even bigger advantage.
By the way, Apple only charges the fee for digital goods. If you buy a CD, there is no 30% fee, but if you buy a subscription for music streaming, Apple says “pay up.” It has never explained why apps that offer digital goods should pay when no one else does.
We aren’t seeking special treatment, only the opportunity to compete on a level playing field. And, let’s be clear. The App Store is the success it is today in large part because of third-party apps such as Spotify. We helped drive consumers to the App Store and kept them on their iPhones for longer and longer stretches. It started out as a win-win for both Apple and Spotify, but Apple soon tilted the playing field to its own advantage.