Apple’s legal team has issued a scathing response to Spotify following its “public attacks” earlier this week.
The music streaming service accused Apple of “causing grave harm to Spotify and its customers” after its App Store review team rejected a recent Spotify update for iOS.
“We find it troubling that you are asking for exemptions to the rules we apply to all developers and are publicly resorting to rumors and half-truths about our service,” wrote Apple general counsel Bruce Sewell in the letter addressed to Spotify general counsel Horacio Gutierrez.
On Thursday, Spotify accused Apple of being “anticompetitive” after it rejected an app update that would have made it possible for users to subscribe to Spotify’s Premium plan through its own billing system — sidestepping Apple’s and its 30 percent cut.
“It continues a troubling pattern of behavior by Apple to exclude and diminish the competitiveness of Spotify on iOS and as a rival to Apple Music, particularly when seen against the backdrop of Apple’s previous anticompetitive conduct aimed at Spotify,” Gutierrez said.
Of course, Apple completely disagrees. Sewell argues that the company’s guidelines apply to all app developers, and that it does not offer “preferential treatment” to certain individuals.
“Our guidelines apply equally to all app developers, whether they are game developers, e-book sellers, video-streaming services or digital music distributors; and regardless of whether or not they compete against Apple,” the letter reads.
“We did not alter our behavior or our rules when we introduced our own music streaming service or when Spotify became a competitor,” Sewell continues. “Ironically, it is now Spotify that wants things to be different by asking for preferential treatment from Apple.”
The letter goes on to dismiss Spotify’s notion that Apple is being anticompetitive. Sewell is also keen to point out that Apple’s platform has generated “hundreds of millions of dollars in incremental revenue” for Spotify over the years.
Sewell finishes by adding that Apple would be “happy to facilitate an expeditious review and approval of your app as soon as you provide us with something that is compliant with the App Store’s rules.”
You can read that letter in full on BuzzFeed News.
Killian Bell is a freelance writer based in the U.K. He has an interest in all things tech and also covers Android over at CultofAndroid.com. You can follow him on Twitter via @killianbell.
17 responses to “Apple hits back at Spotify’s ‘public attacks’”
DIYAAAAAMMMN!!!!!!
Sick burns, Sewell
“Our guidelines apply equally to all app developers, whether they are game developers, e-book sellers, video-streaming services or digital music distributors; and regardless of whether or not they compete against Apple” -> an equal guideline is not a legal or fair one. Monopoly action on the way…
And just because Spotify can’t force Apple to change the guidelines to suit Spotify does not make the guidelines illegal, unfair, or monopolistic.
from the moment apple made a rival that can not be beaten directy… the guideline is unfair
How much did Spotify put into building the iPhone? The App Store? Maintaining the platform? All zero. They want to be in the App Store, but they don’t want to have to pay the price to be there. They want to be able to circumvent the rules and get money directly from subscribers using Apple’s platform and not have to pay the cost of being on the platform. I’m sorry, but this is what happens when you build a good chunk of your business on another company’s back. This isn’t about competing on streaming music, it’s about Spotify now wanting to rewrite the rules – the same rules that they’ve prospered under. Hell, I’m a Spotify suscriber on my iPhone, and have been for almost two years. Why did I stay and not jump ship to Apple Music? Because Spotify has a superior product. They need to quit crying like a baby that they can’t force to Apple work the way Spotify wants, and continue to have a superior product. In short, *compete*. Spotify doesn’t have a legal right to be in the App Store. If they want to be, play by the rules, if not, take your ball and go home. I’ll say this again, just because Spotify doesn’t like the rules doesn’t make the rules illegal, unfair or monopolistic.
typical… changing the subject and, just like apple, ignoring an unfair competition… ms, intel and google already suffered becuase of this behavior
How am I changing the subject??? This all stems from Spotify not wanting to give Apple a cut of the subscription fees that come from the Spotify iPhone app. Apple pays to maintain the App Store, should they just eat that cost so Spotify can run their business the way Spotify wants? Again, they built a big part of their business with a dependency on Apple’s platform, but they want to circumvent the price to be able to make more money for themselves. Instead of giving pithy one sentence replies, explain exactly how that’s fair.
Let me quote this for you again, “Spotify doesn’t have a legal right to be in the App Store.” And for the record, I wasn’t for Microsoft, Intel, or Google suffering, it’s called competition. These companies spent millions/billions developing their product. Don’t like the products? Use something else. Yeah, that’s absolutely not what we need, the government intervening when one company doesn’t like the way a competing company does business.
bla bla bla… apple will lose this battle and you know it, avoiding the unfair apple music advantage
Gosh, what an inspired and thought out response with a compelling argument. You have not given one way that Apple Music in unfair, and I assume you’re not going to.
i’m smarter than that
wow.. petty is as petty does.
“I’m” is capitalized. How smart are you?
way more than blind applefags
Regardless of how equally they enforce their App Store rules, it doesn’t mean Spotify’s accusations didn’t have merit.
I don’t recall getting the impression that Spotify wanted special treatment when I read their comments. I recall feeling as though they didn’t care to raise the cost of their product in the App Store so that their revenue stayed the same so that Apple could take the cut and therefore put their product in a less preferential spot by price to consumers.
Then don’t raise the price. Or make a web-based solution that can be run as a webapp and remove your app from the App Store. Or shut up, innovate, compete and enjoy *your* market dominance. Spotify is one of the most high profile music streaming services and has been the “big dog” for quite a while.
Let me be clear, I am and have been a Spotify suscriber for almost two years now. I tried Apple Music during the free trial, but I liked Spotify better and stayed with it. Honestly, I am now considering canceling and joining Apple Music. Why? Not because I think AM is better, or because I relish moving all my playlists, but because I don’t want to give my money to a company that acts this way. It’s childish. They created a product that had a large dependency on the App Store, and then they start whining because they can’t force the App Store to work the way they want it to. These are the same rules that were in place when they first made and published their app – Apple didn’t change them when they got into the music streaming business. If you don’t like the rules, Spotify, take your ball and go home. But, for the love of God, the LAST thing we need is the government intervening and trying to force a business to run the way a competing business thinks it should.
Spotify, quit whining. It’s simple. Disable the sign up on your app, mention (but don’t link) that you can get a subscription from “our website”.
Will you get as many sign-ups….I bet not. So Apple is benefiting you.
And by the way, this is all obviously pointing at the fact that Spotify is preparing its story of why it’s going out of business and it’s not their crappy business model’s fault, it’s Apple’s perfectly reasonable business model’s fault.