Apple reacts against Spotify's "tax" complaint on the App Store

Apple has fought back against Spotify in an unusual press release according to which the music streaming service "wants to enjoy all the benefits of a free app without being free." Spotify filed an antitrust suit against Apple in Europe earlier this week. The policies of the App Store give Apple an "unfair advantage every turn". But Apple's statement shows that Spotify's claims are misleading.

"The only contribution required by Apple is for digital goods and services purchased in the application using our secure integrated purchase system," Apple said in a statement. "As Spotify points out, this revenue share is 30% for the first year of an annual subscription – but they left out that it would have dropped to 15% in the following years." Ek was complaining about the "tax" of 30% imposed by Apple on subscriptions made from the app.

Apple also notes that most Spotify customers use the free version of the application and that many premium subscribers benefit from packages offered by mobile operators, which yields no revenue to Apple. "A tiny fraction of their subscriptions come under Apple's revenue sharing model," said Apple. "Spotify requests that this number be zero."

The declaration continues:

Let's be clear about what that means. Apple connects Spotify to our users. We provide the platform by which users download and update their application. We share essential software development tools for creating Spotify applications. And we have built a secure payment system – not a small business – that allows users to trust transactions through the app. Spotify wants to keep all these benefits while retaining 100% of revenue.

Spotify would not be what they were today without the ecosystem of the App Store, but they are now taking advantage of their scale to avoid contributing to the preservation of this ecosystem for the next generation of application entrepreneurs. We think that is wrong.

Apple also believes that Spotify's accusations of rejection of Apple Watch applications are "surprising," saying "reviewed and approved." [the app] with the same process and with the same speed as any other application "in September 2018. (The application was released in November of this year.) The arguments of Spotify give the impression of wanting to develop an application that is beyond the scope of what Apple would like to allow third-party developers to create earlier versions of watchOS.

Apple's statement describes its own policy, but it does not address all of Spotify's concerns. For example, he acknowledges that "the only contribution required by Apple relates to the digital goods and services purchased in the application using our secure integrated purchase system", this is n & # 39; Not explain Why Spotify's "digital goods" subscriptions must be subject to transaction fees when Uber or "physical" deliveries are not "physical", or why Spotify should not have the same option to manage payments within of the application. Apple also reiterates the technically questionable claim that Spotify "would sue music creators" to avoid paying higher royalties.

The public relations campaign between Spotify and Apple has been unprecedented this week, and it is unlikely that today's statement will resolve the issue. If anything, it is likely to ignite it.