Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
EU Businesses Music Apple

EU to Fine Apple $500M+ for Stifling Music Competitors Like Spotify (theverge.com) 117

"Apple will reportedly have to pay around €500 million (about $539 million USD) in the EU," reports the Verge, "for stifling competition against Apple Music on the iPhone. Financial Times reported this morning that the fine comes after regulators in Brussels, Belgium investigated a Spotify complaint that Apple prevented apps from telling users about cheaper alternatives to Apple's music service.... The EU whittled its objections down to oppose Apple's refusal to let developers even link out to their own subscription sign-ups within their apps — a policy that Apple changed in 2022 following regulatory pressure in Japan.

$500 million may sound like a lot, but a much bigger fine of close to $40 billion (or 10 percent of Apple's annual global turnover) was on the table when the EU updated its objections last year. Apple was charged over a billion dollars in 2020, but French authorities dropped that to about $366 million after the company appealed.

The Verge cites an Apple spokesperson who said a year ago that the EU case "has no merit."

Reuters that the EU's fine "is expected to be announced early next month, the Financial Times said."

More from Politico The fine would be the EU's first ever against Apple and is expected to be announced early next month, according to the FT report. It is the result of a European Commission antitrust probe into whether Apple's "anti-steering" requirements breach the bloc's abuse of dominance rules, harming music consumers "who may end up paying more" for apps... The Commission will rule that Apple's actions are illegal and against EU competition rules, according to the report.
"The EU executive will ban Apple's practice of barring music services from letting users know of cheaper alternatives outside the App Store, according to the newspaper."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU to Fine Apple $500M+ for Stifling Music Competitors Like Spotify

Comments Filter:
  • by dmomo ( 256005 ) on Sunday February 18, 2024 @07:59PM (#64250090)

    Wake me up when they are all fined for stifling musicians.

  • If the EU says it has merit, then it has merit.

    Or you can fuck off out the EU.

    • Unelected bureaucrats are always right!!

      • How's brexit working out?

        • I hear it's shit. Relevance?

        • by guruevi ( 827432 )

          I heard Dexit and Nexit is next.

          • by keltor ( 99721 ) *
            Poland and Italy seem to most likely to leave if public opinions matter, though Scholz seems on the fast track to piss off Brussels enough that they are forced to leave.
          • Pretty sure that outside some right wing wingnuts who like waving flags and screaming about patriotism, Brexit was a very clear message to everyone that leaving the EU was an incredibly bad idea. The benefits hugely outweigh the negatives.
      • Cry me a river.

        You're saying it as if "the bureaucrats" are all-powerful and the decision was handed down to Apple without an opportunity to appeal, ruzzia or chinar-style.

        The reality is quite the opposite, as you can see even from the TFS, the fine is lower than what "the bureaucrats" asked for, because Apple managed to shave off some of it in court.

        Also, there is nothing wrong with having "unelected bureaucrats" in positions within an administration that are not political, but professional.

        So, no, "bureau

        • Wow, I was saying a LOT! LOL

          Actually, I wasn't speaking to this particular case at all (I actually like the ruling a lot-anything to stick it to Apple, right?), just the idea that unelected bureaucracies in general are always right.

          It's weird such a response inspires such vitriol.

          • Vitriol? Come on, I just pointed out that you should worry less, as your generic statement doesn't apply to the situation we have on hand.

        • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

          The reality is quite the opposite, as you can see even from the TFS, the fine is lower than what "the bureaucrats" asked for, because Apple managed to shave off some of it in court.

          I think the issue is, well, you're having Spotify, an EU company complaining about Apple Music, an American company.

          The other problem is, Spotify is the #1 music streaming company in the world, Apple Music may be #2, but the problem still remains - Spotify has remained #1 the whole time they were complaining - so is it really unf

    • It will be interesting if the EU finishes banning iOS and Google Play. Iâm sure Chinese Android AppStores arenâ(TM)t going to get bannedâ¦
      • by jsonn ( 792303 )
        Why should they? Applying increasing fines worked very well in the past to change abuses of monopolies. At least part of the 30% app tax will go to some proper use now.
        • Apple's iPhone isn't a monopoly.

          • by jsonn ( 792303 )
            From the perspective of an app developer, it is. Given how brand conscious American teenager seem to be, arguing anything else is ridiculous.
            • When I make custom parts for Ferraris then sure Ferrari is a monopoly for my niche business.

              So what?

              iPhone is not a monopoly for smart phones and absolutely nothing forces a develop to build apps for it. In fact, since they are very much a minority of the iPhone market compared to android, and the environment is so horrible for iPhone devs, why would they write an iPhone app anyway? Seems foolish to burn dev time creating for a hostile and relatively small population environment.

              • monopoly

                Literally none of the laws say anything about monopolies. It's about whether they are big enough to have a distorting effect on the market and then use that distortion for profit. All the talk about monopolies is just a red herring from people who have no clue what they are talking about.

                • monopoly

                  Literally none of the laws say anything about monopolies. It's about whether they are big enough to have a distorting effect on the market and then use that distortion for profit. All the talk about monopolies is just a red herring from people who have no clue what they are talking about.

                  Talk about Subjective Criteria!

                  "Distorting Effect" means whatever the FINE RECEIVERS want it to mean.

                  What a load of horseshit. Taken to its CURRENT extreme, why should ANY company endeavor to create a Superior Product or Service? All that will happen is people will start preferring it, and BOOM! the "Market is Distorted!"

                  Gimme a break!

                  I guess the EU just likes Socialism after all. . .

                  • by jsonn ( 792303 )
                    The iOS ecosystem is effectively a closed market on its own, as there is little interoperability of Apps between iOS and Android. iOS is large enough that "Well, don't develop for it" is in fact a distorting effect between apps and services competing in the same field. Let's pick any two streaming apps: given that iOS is somewhere between 1/3 (EU) and 1/2 (USA) of all mobile devices, any service forced to drop one is at a serious competitive disadvantage. At the same time, there are few reasons for Apple to
                    • The iOS ecosystem is effectively a closed market on its own, as there is little interoperability of Apps between iOS and Android. iOS is large enough that "Well, don't develop for it" is in fact a distorting effect between apps and services competing in the same field. Let's pick any two streaming apps: given that iOS is somewhere between 1/3 (EU) and 1/2 (USA) of all mobile devices, any service forced to drop one is at a serious competitive disadvantage. At the same time, there are few reasons for Apple to lower prices of their cash cow. Ironically, even less so in the USA, because customers want to price gauged as Droids are cheap, right?

                      What you don't seem to understand is that there is a huge difference between having a superior product and dictating terms to million of people. You can produce a superior vacuum cleaner and no one is forced to use it. Outside replacement parts, there is very little vendor lock-in either. The situation for a mobile platform is vastly different. If US regulators weren't sleeping, the same would have happened in the USA, too.

                      Your "arguments" are weak kimchee.

                      First, the iOS "Market" is nonexistent; so say the US Courts. They have Held that the actual Market is comprised of all Cellphone OEMs. And to say that Apple Controls that Market is to defy Mathematics.

                      No one is forced to Purchase nor Develop-for Apple Products. They just aren't. And no amount of statistical jiggery nor Knee-Jerk Legislation can make it so.

                      US Regulators aren't Sleeping; rather, EU Regulators are Grandstanding, Greedy and Shockingly Ignorant of Technology. T

            • From the perspective of an app developer, it is. Given how brand conscious American teenager seem to be, arguing anything else is ridiculous.

              Tough shit. Develop for Android.

          • fortunately that decision is left to non-foaming at the mouths apple cultists
      • I'm interested to hear how did you come to the conclusion that the EU is trying to ban iOS and Google play. It is an interesting thesis, but lacks argumentation.

        Please provide the facts and the logic that connects them into a plausible hypothesis, otherwise someone might think you're just dumping bullshit on us, and you're not, right?

  • Time for the US to retaliate. This is just as bogus as trying to force Apple to pay an Irish tax that didnâ(TM)t exist.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      And what would they retaliate against? Also remember this have been verified by two (!) courts. Unless the US wants to go full-rogue, there is no way to "retaliate". Even the US cannot afford to ignore international laws and treaties unless it wants to destroy its domestic economy.

      • by Ossifer ( 703813 )

        EU products. Raise tariffs to compensate for the laws the EU is writing specifically to only impact American companies. Look up "chicken tax" for similar. The fact that EU courts support EU laws doesn't impress. The EU has a LONG history of outright protectionism, and there is nothing "rogue" about retaliation under GATT. Nice try though.

        • by gweihir ( 88907 )

          "Retaliating" for a law breaking company getting punished is "going rogue".

          • by Ossifer ( 703813 )

            Not if the law was expressly written to apply a tax and/or restraint on trade onto a foreign company, deliberately exempting EU companies. It's called trade retaliation.

            "Going rogue" is what the EU did.

        • and there is nothing "rogue" about retaliation under GATT. Nice try though.

          The WTO has dispute mechanisms to decide what is allowed under GATT or not. That would be a good place to start.

    • by Ossifer ( 703813 )

      It's not "troll" because you disagree or want to censor somebody.

  • ... to enjoy Apple's walled-garden abuses. Repeatedly. To the point they regularly crow about it.

    These consumers wanted this. How are they only now realising it'a an abusive relationship?

    The answer is actaully much simpler than treating litigation as a revenue stream. Consumers could choose to stop buying Apple's garbage.

    So either the EU consumer base has the collective IQ of a rotting banana or EU legislators believe they do. Which is it?

  • The point here is the 30% apple tax on any revenue from within the app.
    Not sure what the "cut" SHOULD be, but 30% just for distribution of a well-known app, which is living on different platforms is INSANE for such a large corporation.

    The exact model for apple store (which is a value-add to the iPhone as well, and those are sold at decent profit as well) is for me quite unclear, but 30% of a billion-dollar profit margin is enough to launch your own fully functioning app store with ALL costs surrounding it c

    • 'Outside the asylum' (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Bruce66423 ( 1678196 ) on Monday February 19, 2024 @04:11AM (#64250732)

      One of the later books in the Douglas Adams' 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' series has:

      'One of the many many reasons why people thought him insane was because of the peculiarity of his house which, even in a land where most people's houses were peculiar in one way or another, was quite extreme in his peculiarness.

      'His house was called The Outside of the Asylum.

      'His name was simply John Watson, though he preferred to be called - and some of his friends had now reluctantly agreed to this -Wonko the Sane.'

      That Apple has got away with it for so long is evidence that Wonko is probably right in his designation of most of the world as an asylum for the sane.

  • I put Spotify on my iPhone w/o any problems, wasn't hindered in any way !!! I wasn't stifled in any way !!! The EU executive will ban Apple's practice of barring music services from letting users know of cheaper alternatives outside the App Store, according to the newspaper." If you have half a brain, you can look up, get any music app and put on your phone !!!
  • Is that Spotify and others agreed to the terms to develop and publish apps for the iPhone.

    These terms WERE, initially, laid out clearly. Now, if the terms changed, developers should have been permitted to continue using the old or accept the new terms or old. If using the old, the vendor assumes liability when their product goes against a countries laws...not Apple. That's where Apple F'd up as they changed rules as THEY saw fit.

    Now, they are up against of law makers who clearly have a bug up their ass a

    • by jsonn ( 792303 )
      The nice Italian Don also provided very clear terms of services to ensure the protection of your business.
  • "European companies cannot compete fairly," complains Spotify, who commands 30% of the music streaming, above competitors Amazon, Tencent, and Apple, who each have 15% shares.
    https://explodingtopics.com/bl... [explodingtopics.com]

    What a steaming crock of dung.

The truth of a proposition has nothing to do with its credibility. And vice versa.

Working...