Yesterday there were two interesting news in the world of streaming music. The first is the main topic of this post and the second is the one that we have published a few hours ago, that Apple could be negotiating the purchase of Tidal. And it turns out that Spotify has been angry with Apple because, they say, the Cupertino people have rejected the latest update of their application to harm them and benefit his own music streaming service, Apple Music.
In a letter they have sent to Apple, Spotify says they are causing "a serious harm to Spotify and its customers»When declining to update your iPhone application. They also say that Apple has used the iOS control to eliminate its competition in music, raising the prices of other services and forbidding this competition from telling their customers that there is a way to pay less. But is everything that Spotify says true?
Spotify aims to get customers from its iOS app
If we leave the story here without listening to the other party, we might think that, indeed, Apple is a despotic company that only tries to harm companies that do the same as it. But Apple's response has not been long in coming and says that Spotify's intention is use your iOS app to get new customers and sell subscriptions. In this sense, the App Store has the same rules for everyone and under the payment section we have the following:
3.1.1 In-app purchases: if you want to unlock features or enhancements within your app (for example, subscriptions, coins from a game, levels from a game, access premium content or unlock the full version), you must use in-app purchase. The applications they should not include buttons, external links or other invocations that direct the customer to a purchase mechanism other than the IAP purchase […]
3.1.2 Subscriptions: The Automatic subscription renewal should only be offered using in-app purchase and should only be used for newspapers (such as magazines), business applications (such as business, productivity, professional creation, or cloud storage), multimedia applications (eg video, audio, voice, or photo sharing), and other approved services ( eg dating, diet or meteorology) […].
Reading the above standards, we understand that the Apple version also says that the Spotify application must be only to use the service, not to get customers and sell subscriptions. To do all this you must use your own means and not take advantage of the App Store. If you get customers thanks to your application for iOS, you must pay 30% of the subscription or 15% from the first year.
As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, this news is the first of two that occurred yesterday, being the second to be known that Apple could be negotiating to buy Tidal. Interestingly, Spotify's complaint was made known only hours before the rumor began to circulate that Cupertino's interest in Tidal, a streaming music service that offers high-quality sound and that has the exclusive rights of many Important artists, like Beyoncé, who, although she ends up putting her music on Apple Music, it is only on Tidal for a while, or Madonna.
Apple Music is already a streaming music service to consider. In 12 months he has achieved 15 million subscribers and that is something that he has achieved thanks to the purchase of Beats (by Iovine's contacts). In fact, iTunes Radio was nowhere near what Apple Music is now. If they buy from Tidal, Apple Music will win a lot of integers and offer even more exclusive material, which makes us think that Spotify's "tantrum" is more because it feels threatened than because of having to pay a little per hundred of the subscription users who pay from the iOS application. What do you think?
What Apple you have is a monopoly and they want to keep everything ... let's suppose I have an IPHONE and someone recommended spotify to me, if I create the account from the iPhone, that's why Spotify has to give it 30% as they know that practically nobody uses pc in these times only for things at university or professional jobs know that almost everything is through cell phones and I find it unfair ... is it abuse of power ... or was I wrong ????
Hi Levid. Whether it is abuse of power or not, that should be decided by a judge if Spotify denounces. On the other hand, Apple's intention is for Spotify to use its own means to get customers. If someone recommends Spotify to you, they also have to tell you the best way to use it. What Apple does not want, and this is understandable in part, is for just that to happen, for Spotify or any other application to use its infrastructure to get customers.
In other words and so that you understand: it is as if I have a house, they are going to stick a poster on me and I say “no, you don't stick it here because it is my house. If you want to put your billboard on my front, pay me. Later, if you start complaining saying "he won't let me stick my poster on his façade" ... You can always stick it on all the others if they let you, right? Quickly and wrongly put, what Apple is saying is “do you want to get customers? Find your life, don't take advantage of me. I am already allowing you to celebrate the event in my facilities, and for free if they bring the entrance from home. I charge you 30% of the tickets that I sell at my box office ».
A greeting.
I use YouTube the most, the compilation lists of users are where I enjoy the most