Spotify says Apple's new “unacceptable” plan “disregards” the DMA's “fundamental requirements”; Tim Sweeney calls it “malicious compliance” with a 15% junk fee

Count Spotify and Epic Games among the Apple critics who are not happy …

TechCrunch 2024-08-09 Sarah Perez

Context & Ripple Effects

Spotify's response continues a long-running conflict over Apple's platform terms: it previously argued that Apple's DMA changes would keep developers tied to the status quo, while Xbox president Sarah Bond separately called the policy direction a step backward. Epic's intervention broadens the criticism beyond music subscriptions to another major App Store challenger.

The dispute also follows Spotify's earlier claim that Apple had blocked its audiobook purchase flow under App Store rules, a conflict that put purchasing design at the center of the rivalry. The new disagreement is therefore about whether revised terms materially change those constraints, not simply whether Apple has announced an alternative path.

First-order effects

Spotify and Epic are publicly rejecting Apple's revised approach, with Epic characterizing its 15% charge as a “junk fee”; the immediate effect is heightened pressure on Apple to defend how its DMA-facing terms operate.
Developers weighing Apple’s new route must assess its fee and compliance conditions against the existing App Store model, rather than treating the policy change as a straightforward reduction in platform friction.

Second-order effects

The aligned criticism from Spotify, Epic, and earlier Xbox commentary gives DMA oversight a more concrete implementation dispute: whether Apple's terms preserve meaningful commercial choice for developers.
Other app businesses may use the competing claims to press for clearer pricing and purchasing rules, especially where alternative distribution or payment arrangements are meant to reduce dependence on Apple’s standard terms.

Third-order effects

If regulated platform changes continue to be contested over residual fees and conditions, enforcement will increasingly turn on the economic substance of compliance rather than the existence of new formal options.
The broader structural question is whether regulation can shift bargaining power from a dominant mobile platform to developers when the platform retains control over access, rules, and charges.

The trend: This is part of the shift from regulating app-store gatekeeping in principle to testing whether implementation terms deliver workable developer choice.

Discussion

@blowdart.me Barry Dorrans on bluesky
It's really hard to be sympathetic to Spotify given how hard they screw over artists. [embedded post]
@timsweeneyepic Tim Sweeney on x
In the European Union where the new DMA law opens up app store competition, Apple continues its malicious compliance by imposing an illegal new 15% junk fee on users migrating to competing stores and monitor commerce on these competing stores. https://developer.apple.com/ ... [im…
@bzamayo Benjamin Mayo on x
Imagine you are Spotify. You list your app in the EU on the Apple App Store, and link out to your website for payment. Assuming a new user downloads the iOS app first, you will now be subject to a >20% commission on any new purchases; that includes if the purchase is made later
@timsweeneyepic Tim Sweeney on x
[Image: Dr. Evil, with Putin's face, air quotes “COMPLY"]
@lewis_crofts Lewis Crofts on x
.@Apple makes a new move to comply with #DMA. This time it allows developers to link out more fully (scream about offers/prices/alternatives). And a new fee structure: 5pc of purchases for 1y as an “acquisition fee” and then 10pc for “service fee.” https://developer.apple.com/ ..…
@lewis_crofts Lewis Crofts on x
The boss of @EpicGames gives his view on @Apple latest DMA compliance attempt:
@mzunigap Mario Zúñiga on x
Apple's changes seem fair and directionally DMA compliant to me. By its very nature, compliance with DMA requirements will be a trial-and-error process. Also, let's not forget that the DMA does not mandate free access ... Some want a free lunch, and then some!
@timsweeneyepic Tim Sweeney on x
[Image: Peanuts character Lucy preparing to pull the football away from Charlie Brown]
@timsweeneyepic Tim Sweeney on x
Of course, Apple long ago banned Fortnite from the Apple App Store. We remain on track to launch the Epic Games Store on iOS in the European Union soon. If necessary, alone.
@timsweeneyepic Tim Sweeney on x
Apple's terms make it completely uneconomical for developers to distribute their apps through both the Apple App Store and competing iOS app stores, thus denying new app store market entrants any chance of competing and growing organically through better terms.
r/apple r on reddit
Spotify and Epic Games call Apple's revised DMA compliance plan ‘confusing,’ ‘illegal’ and ‘unacceptable’ | TechCrunch
@eshumarneedi @eshumarneedi on threads
Babe, wake up, Apple added not one, but two new fees for EU developers. — Honestly, if you can remember all of the various rules and fees for the EU App Store, I commend you. That's impressive. — RE: https://www.threads.net/...
@stroughtonsmith … Steve Troughton-Smith on mastodon
Here we go again. Fees upon fees upon fees. — https://mastodon.social/...
@iKyle@mastodon.social Kyle Howells on mastodon
This is insane. — Apple's new rules aren't any better either and aren't going to be allowed either. — They are just dragging this out as long as they possibly can. — https://mastodon.social/...
@stroughtonsmith … Steve Troughton-Smith on mastodon
At this point I think I would feel relief if Apple were barred from doing business in the EU outright. Just show them the door. I'm ready to move on with my life
@eric_seufert Eric Seufert on x
What's important to consider about Apple's new link-out fees in the EU: they apply to purchases made on *any* platform after the user has installed the iOS app. As with the CTF, this imposes a liability on developers that they can't control. For link-out under the legacy busine…
@mgsiegler M.G. Siegler on x
You can't help but feel that this is getting so impenetrable that it's almost like Apple is doing it this way on purpose... 🤣 https://spyglass.org/...
@mysk_co @mysk_co on x
What's next? What stops Apple from charging €10 for the Core Technology Fee (CTF) instead of €0.50? The best thing in the announcement is that the link that should lead to the page explaining this frenzy of fees is broken. [video]
@carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
The interesting dance around Apple's DMA compliance is that it seems clear that the EU wants Apple to stop taxing developers for IAPs while Apple's compliance is to just rebrand the fee and keep the tax. We will see who blinks first. https://techcrunch.com/...
@carnage4life Dare Obasanjo on x
Apple has updated its DMA compliance and removed its Core Technology fee for developers who link to their website to pay digital goods instead of using the App Store. They have replaced with two additional fees totalling 15% (5% for acquisition & 10% for “store services"). [image…
@bzamayo Benjamin Mayo on x
So in case you weren't confused already by the EU rules, here's a wholly new tiered structure of fees specifically for apps that link out to an alternative purchase method on the web. https://9to5mac.com/...
@ballmatthew Matthew Ball on x
omg new EU iOS app fees [image]
@mgsiegler M.G. Siegler on x
These seem like good changes. But it also seems like Apple is going to try to smother most developers from ever implementing them thanks to a beyond convoluted structure and web of fees.
r/apple r on reddit
Apple announces new fee structure for apps in the EU that link out to the web for purchases

Chronicles