Senator Urges DOJ And FTC To Investigate Apple Music

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
If this senator has his way, Apple could be investigated for anticompetitive behavior in the music streaming market.

“Increased competition in the music streaming market should mean that consumers will ultimately benefit through more choices of better products and at lower prices,” wrote Sen. Franken. “I am concerned, however, that Apple’s position as a dominant platform operator may actually undermine many of the potential consumer benefits of its entry into the market. To protect consumer choice and promote greater transparency of pricing, I ask that you review Apple’s business practices with respect to its competitors in the music streaming market.”
 
Oh boys... the US just loves wasting money and time on ridiculous avenues.
 
This is a tough one... I think I actually hate Al Franken a lot more than I dislike Apple. It's odd finding myself siding with the fruit on this one.
 
The only streaming service that actually owns the music they stream is Spotify (since it is owned by a couple of music companies) ... all other streaming companies (including Apple) must license their music to stream from the content owners and the pricing is largely a function of the licensing fees and transaction fees they must pay ... if they want to investigate someone for limiting the market or pricing then they should look to the big music publishers (and not Apple) ;)
 
The only streaming service that actually owns the music they stream is Spotify (since it is owned by a couple of music companies) ... all other streaming companies (including Apple) must license their music to stream from the content owners and the pricing is largely a function of the licensing fees and transaction fees they must pay ... if they want to investigate someone for limiting the market or pricing then they should look to the big music publishers (and not Apple) ;)

Who do you think prompted the investigation? Someone whose afraid Apple could dictate terms and back in iTunes' hey day, they kind of did.
 
Another collusion with the industry to kill competition and raise prices but replace ebooks with music streaming. Queue the apologists and their desire to pay more to see Apple overly profitable.
 
Yep, pay more to the tune of $10 bucks like every other music streaming premium service or $15 bucks for the entire family up to 6 people :rolleyes:
 
Another collusion with the industry to kill competition and raise prices but replace ebooks with music streaming. Queue the apologists and their desire to pay more to see Apple overly profitable.

Well, Apple is hardly a monopoly in the Smartphone space (their market share is under 20% and dropping) ... Android is the dominant player ... this seems heavily targeted at the 30% transaction fee that Apple and every other Smartphone app store, including Google, Amazon, and Microsoft charge ... whether that fee is fair or not is probably debatable but it is hardly unique to Apple ... I am just not sure where they are going with this

It is worth noting that for all the hullabaloo about Apple's entry into the ebook arena there was one notable change that seems to be glossed over ... prior to Apple's entry, Amazon charged 50% or more of the purchase price as a fee for administering the ebboks on their site ... they dropped that to the industry standard 30% due to Apple's entry into the market ... Steam as well was rumored to charge a higher fee that was dropped to the industry standard 30%
 
All you can eat for $10 a month. Ability to download for offline play. 30 million song library.

Stop trying to help us and shut the fuck up before you ruin it for everyone!

If you want to investigate, investigate the RIAA.
 
Probably an entry point in sanctioning the controversial talk shows that they host on the service.
 
I don't know. If history proves itself, Apple will eat up Pandora and Spotify. Maybe this is a good check and balance. I love Pandora. It's a very simple service and is cheap.
 
Another collusion with the industry to kill competition and raise prices but replace ebooks with music streaming. Queue the apologists and their desire to pay more to see Apple overly profitable.

Hold the phone, are you siding with Apple?
 
I don't know one way or the other cause I don't own an iPhone, but can you use something other then iTunes as a music app on iphones?

Because if Apple won't allow other apps on their phones then the Senator has a point and market share has nothing to do with it. It's no different then Microsoft trying to force people to use IE instead of competing browsers.
 
I don't know one way or the other cause I don't own an iPhone, but can you use something other then iTunes as a music app on iphones?

Because if Apple won't allow other apps on their phones then the Senator has a point and market share has nothing to do with it. It's no different then Microsoft trying to force people to use IE instead of competing browsers.

I use Pandora on my iPhone. Works great. I know Spotify works fine also.
 
If Sen. Al Frankan's kids do not marry Ben Stein's kids both of their lives will be failures.
 
I'm not a lawyer on this stuff, KBrickly is the closest I know of here on the [H]

But it seems to me that there are probably a few basic types of anti-competitive activities a company can attempt to get away with.

One would be something like we were thinking of a minute ago, basically engineering your products in such a way that 3rd parties can't be used on your product. "All our cars use our patented lugs that are stronger and last longer" and that no one else can make wheels for cause we'll sue the shit out of them for patent infringement.

I am sure there are some other basic approaches and if you knew what they were you could run right down the list and figure out what it is Apple is actually being accused of doing.
 
Back
Top