The European Commission has fined Apple over €1.8 billion for abusing its dominant position on the market for the distribution of music streaming apps to iPhone and iPad users (‘iOS users’) through its App Store. In particular, the Commission found that Apple applied restrictions on app developers preventing them from informing iOS users about alternative and cheaper music subscription services available outside of the app (‘anti-steering provisions’). This is illegal under EU antitrust rules.
And Apple released a letter that sounds petty and greedy.
Under the App Store’s reader rule, Spotify can also include a link in their app to a webpage where users can create or manage an account.
Instead, Spotify wants to bend the rules in their favor by embedding subscription prices in their app without using the App Store’s In-App Purchase system.
I’m confused now. What is a “reader app”?
Spotify wants to make subscriptions an app functionality and Apple restricts that to it’s own payment system - and the alternative they provide is external websites?
Why the heck is it called a “reader rule” and “reader app”?
It reads like a child throwing a temper tantrum…
Doesn’t it‽ it’s nuts how bad it sounds.
Nice interrobang!
Even though the Commission has fined the company concerned, damages may be awarded by national courts without being reduced on account of the Commission fine.
So if/after Apple’s appeal is declined, Spotify - the driving force of this EU investigation - can sue Apple for damages with additional cost to Apple.
Not just Spotify. If I’m reading this judgement correctly, any developer who was materially impacted by these anti-steering provisions can sue Apple. This could be the beginning of an unprecedented wave of legal action against Apple in Europe. The tricky part is proving damages.
Yes. I singled out Spotify because they were the driving force on the EU investigation, and are big enough to invest into it. But like you say, it’s open to anyone.
