7 ms·
Spotify does not get that money. The general EU budget does. > Fines imposed on undertakings found in breach of EU antitrust rules are paid into the general EU
by miguelxt 3y ago
Spotify does not get that money. The general EU budget does.
> Fines imposed on undertakings found in breach of EU antitrust rules are paid into the general EU budget. This money is not earmarked for particular expenses, but Member States' contributions to the EU budget for the following year are reduced accordingly. The fines therefore help to finance the EU and reduce the burden for taxpayers.
https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/index/fines_en https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/index/fines_en
- jeltz 3y agoYes, these are fines, not damages. The headline says as much.
- leereeves 3y agoCan Spotify sue for damages as well?
- techpression 3y agoThere are no damages really, without Apple Spotify would be a dead product by now. Their entire existence is more or less due to the advent of iPhones and the App Store where customers subscriptions were significantly higher than any other platform (this was common knowledge within the organization too, we loved Apple, I say we as I worked there for many years)
- Hikikomori 3y agoWell Apple would be nowhere without the invention of the wheel.
- andybak 3y agoWithout Apple, there would be other mobile devices, surely? It was an idea that was in the air. Arguments about Apple doing it better or quicker or differently don't have much bearing on your specific point here.
- techpression 3y agoThere were, windows phone and android, but neither could prove the Spotify model that offering a free tier led to paying subscribers (and at least Android had enough market share for this to be certain), something their entire existence was built on and something the labels questioned a lot. People seem to forget this part entirely. Now you could argue everyone on iOS would pay as happily on Android if there were no iOS, but then you argue fiction against reality.
- andybak 3y agoYour argument is about a hypothetical counterfactual. We are both arguing fiction against fiction. We can't re-run the experiment without Apple.
- techpression 3y agoNo, my argument is what actually did happen, in this reality. There’s no need for any experiment to be run to state what events led to what is today, and what would happen in a another reality like the one you described in your first post is irrelevant for the subject at hand. Apple provided Spotify the platform they needed to prove their business model, it really is as simple as that. All the other infinite possibilities are moot.
- sebstefan 3y ago"without Apple Spotify would be a dead product by now" is fiction as well You can argue fiction against fiction by saying everyone on iOS would pay as happily on Android if there were no iOS
- techpression 3y agoTrue without context, but not if you worked there at the time. It’s hard to describe just how much iOS did for Spotify at a crucial time of the company’s existence. But sure, we will never know for sure, but certain outcomes have far higher likelihoods than others.
- jeltz 3y agoInteresting question and I suspect so but since I am no lawyer plus have never heard of such a case in the media I do not know.
- vincnetas 3y agoThey do not sell subscriptions on apple store.
- spywaregorilla 3y agoI wonder if there is perhaps some sort of anti-trust based reason for that?