Spotify Consciously Violated Apple's Developer Guidelines

[Sunshine1868]

ArsTechnica linked here

People have been blaming the declined Spotify update on Apple's unwillingness to allow competition however, following a statement from Apple, Spotify were actually in the wrong. 

Quote

Today, Apple General Counsel Bruce Sewell responded, saying that Spotify's app update violated Apple's App Review guidelines and that the company would gladly approve and distribute the update once the problem had been fixed.

Spotify tried to put links to subscription into the app subverting Apple's subscription model (which is against the terms of service). 

Quote

Specifically, Spotify has apparently violated rule 3.1.1 of Apple's App Store Review Guidelines, which states that apps may not provide external links or other text that invites users to subscribe to services through sites rather than Apple's own in-app purchase system. Apple says that Spotify's update replaced the previous in-app purchase option "with an account sign-up feature clearly intended to circumvent Apple's in-app purchase rules." Apple alerted Spotify of the problem, and Spotify apparently submitted a second version of the update that asked users "to submit an e-mail address so they could be contacted directly by Spotify."

As quick as people were to jump on Apple for this, Spotify was clearly in the wrong for consciously trying to subvert a set of carefully defined rules. As bad as everybody here thinks Apple is, Spotify were repeatedly and consciously trying to break the rules.

[79wjd]

Spotify was clearly in the wrong, but I think Apple also needs to revise their subscription percentage (i.e. put either a yearly cap on the amount that they can get from a subscription -- $36/year from Spotify is a bit crazy considering that a spotify user likely spends a decent bit of time on the desktop client too).

 

Either way, I find it hysterical that everyone jumps to conclusions basically blames Apple for terrorism.

[minibois]

But I suppose Spotify has worked the same way for ages now though, so it's just like the Amazon vs. LMG thing, why did Apple take so long to actually do something about it?

[Curufinwe_wins]

Uhh no. The rules here are a direct result of APPLE being a complete asshat and trying to skim directly from any and all spotify subscriptions. Which is complete bullshit.

 

 

[79wjd]

3 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Uhh no. The rules here are a direct result of APPLE being a complete asshat and trying to skim directly from any and all spotify subscriptions. Which is complete bullshit.

It's bullshit for Apple to try and take a cut of ALL spotify subscribers who happen to also use the iOS version of the app. It's not bullshit for them to get some kickback from those who are using the iOS app.

 

The only truly fair way for a subscription model to work would be if Spotify released usage data about what percentage of time the iOS app was used compared to the desktop app (for people who use the iOS app) and then give Apple a cut relative to that amount -- 30% if they ONLY used the iOS app and 0% if they never used it but downloaded it. Seeing as that sort of information will never be honestly transferred between the two companies the only way is to set a flat % fee and either cap at at an estimated (and agreed upon) amount or have this back-and-forth bickering. 

[Gullerback]

Says apple are actually in the right...  I read and i still see apple being scumbags

[Curufinwe_wins]

3 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

It's bullshit for Apple to try and take a cut of ALL spotify subscribers who happen to also use the iOS version of the app. It's not bullshit for them to get some kickback from those who are using the iOS app.

 

The only truly fair way for a subscription model to work would be if Spotify released usage data about what percentage of time the iOS app was used compared to the desktop app (for people who use the iOS app) and then give Apple a cut relative to that amount -- 30% if they ONLY used the iOS app and 0% if they never used it but downloaded it. Seeing as that sort of information will never be honestly transferred between the two companies the only way is to set a flat % fee and either cap at at an estimated (and agreed upon) amount or have this back-and-forth bickering. 

Yea, no. I don't think that is right anyways. Apple is specifically doing this to make other services less competitive with their own. It is completely utter bullshit.

 

 

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Uhh no. The rules here are a direct result of APPLE being a complete asshat and trying to skim directly from any and all spotify subscriptions. Which is complete bullshit.

 

 

The reason for the rule itself very well might be anti-consumer in nature (though not illegal), Spotify still broke the rules which were clearly defined.

 

So at best, they're both at fault. If Spotify doesn't agree with those rules, they should work to get those rules changed, not try to bypass them and then later get pissy when they get called out.

 

While I personally don't agree with Apple, it's a tough situation. Apple is providing the distribution network and the bandwidth/servers/filespace for Spotify's iOS users, and because the app is "free" with a subscription based system, Apple makes no money from that.

 

On the flip side, even those who use Spotify on iOS, can also use that same account and subscription on a hundred other platforms and devices. Should Apple really get a 30% (or even 15%) cut of the subscription, if they cannot guarantee that you will be using Spotify exclusively on an iOS device?

 

That would be similar to Apple charging your bank a 30% fee on your monthly bank account fees, simply because you *might* use the banks iOS app. (Obviously this is not a 1-to-1 comparison, but it's a similar idea).

[Curufinwe_wins]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

snip

Yea Spotify "breaking these rules" are in my mind tantamount to civil disobedience against segregation laws.

 

Without Spotify calling out these horseshit rules, no one would even know APPLE is trying this crap. 

 

 

The bank comparison is a great explanation to why this is insane.

[laminutederire]

30 minutes ago, Sunshine1868 said:

ArsTechnica linked here

People have been blaming the declined Spotify update on Apple's unwillingness to allow competition however, following a statement from Apple, Spotify were actually in the wrong. 

Spotify tried to put links to subscription into the app subverting Apple's subscription model (which is against the terms of service). 

As quick as people were to jump on Apple for this, Spotify was clearly in the wrong for consciously trying to subvert a set of carefully defined rules. As bad as everybody here thinks Apple is, Spotify were repeatedly and consciously trying to break the rules.

The rules of apple are a bit extreme though...

[Misanthrope]

For once a quote from Logan is actually useful: "Stop using Apple products"

[jaggysnake57]

ha this forum is hilarious.....google do the same fucking thing......30% charge for everything from app purchases to IAP and subs......muppets

[dalekphalm]

6 minutes ago, jaggysnake57 said:

ha this forum is hilarious.....google do the same fucking thing......30% charge for everything from app purchases to IAP and subs......muppets

I personally would never subscribe to something like Spotify via their iOS or Android App. I would go right to the source, and sub via their website. Not to mention they always have sweet $0.99/month for 3 month deals that they give out all the time.

 

But many users don't know how to do that, or for some reason, only learn about Spotify through the app. These are the people who are getting boned, paying an extra $3 per month.

[Sunshine1868]

13 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

I personally would never subscribe to something like Spotify via their iOS or Android App. I would go right to the source, and sub via their website. Not to mention they always have sweet $0.99/month for 3 month deals that they give out all the time.

 

But many users don't know how to do that, or for some reason, only learn about Spotify through the app. These are the people who are getting boned, paying an extra $3 per month.

The whole point is so that iOS&&Spotify users have a one-stop-shop for subscriptions - the same credit card they use for all iTunes transactions get charged by the same people

 

Google do the same thing for Android&&Spotify (or other subscription based services)...just because its apple doesn't mean its evil. 

[dalekphalm]

10 minutes ago, Sunshine1868 said:

The whole point is so that iOS&&Spotify users have a one-stop-shop for subscriptions - the same credit card they use for all iTunes transactions get charged by the same people

 

Google do the same thing for Android&&Spotify (or other subscription based services)...just because its apple doesn't mean its evil. 

I am aware that both iOS and Android does it. I am not, and have not, ever called Apple evil or their actions evil. So I'm not sure why you're bringing that up.

 

I agree, that it's for simplicity and ease of use for Mobile Users, and I agree that it should be easy for them to do and in a way that doesn't cost extra money. But considering how often Spotify does these promotions, it's pretty easy to hop on their website if you're more of a power user.

 

For those who are regular Joe's, they are the ones that this will concern most.

 

There are two, equally valid sides to this particular problem.

 

Apple is supporting the app download and delivery infrastructure, and their business model is around taking a cut of sales.

 

Spotify, however, is multi-platform, and even if you do sign up on iOS, you might spend most of your Spotify usage on, say, your Desktop, listening to Spotify while at work.

 

So I understand both concerns. The main issue is that Apple prevents Spotify from putting links to sign up on their site. I understand why they do this, but it is rather disadvantageous for Spotify.

[Sunshine1868]

2 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

~snip~

I wasn't saying you were, I meant it in a more broad sense - people here are all too often quick to blame Apple for everything when in fact, they often aren't to blame. thats all

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Sunshine1868 said:

I wasn't saying you were, I meant it in a more broad sense - people here are all too often quick to blame Apple for everything when in fact, they often aren't to blame. thats all

Well on that you have 100% agreement from me.

 

I personally don't like Mac OS X. I wouldn't use it personally. But my fiancee uses it, and she loves it, and I sure as hell am not gonna be the one to tell her she's "wrong" for liking it more than Windows. There's nothing wrong with it. It's just different.

 

Same goes for iOS and the rest of Apple products and services. Some are suited better for one type of person over another. Others are simply based on personal preference.

 

Apple makes some kickass stuff, but LTT forums has a raging hate boner for Apple, in general.

[Sunshine1868]

4 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Apple makes some kickass stuff, but LTT forums has a raging hate boner for Apple, in general.

Its the blind hatred and conscious unwillingness to give apple products a try that bother me most...and I'm primarily only here to help people with networking troubles, server hardware, and virtualization setups ? 

 

but again, I digress. either way, Spotify shouldn't have tried TWICE to violate the terms and service; especially when those terms of service are industry-standard

[RedRound2]

Again, LTT people went to hate Apple without knowing the whole story. When the story first came out, I did wonder (and I'm pretty sure every sane person also did) how Spotify used to handle subscription before the update and also other services like Google Play Music, etc as apple hasn't changed the terms recently apart from taking smaller cuts in some cases

[Centurius]

This is why you shouldn't jump to conclusions when a single company makes a statement.