[crimbles]

[flagged]

[izzydata]

It is better as consumers to let them fight it out. Competition is typically in the consumers favor so it should be encouraged. I don't need to be in favor of Apple, Epic Games or Spotify to want them all to fight it out and reduce the rent seeking gains for everyone.

[shmatt]

Spotify themselves split revenue with artists 70/30, just like Apple

[bearjaws]

So in that same 30%, Spotify pays:

1. Engineering staff

2. Hosting costs (probably tens of millions of dollars annually)

3. All other liabilities

Apple for that 30% 1. Charges a credit card

2. Pushes app updates

3. "Verifies" app quality (aka ensure theres no payment links)

How is that remotely the same?

[ludocode]

Do you at least have sympathy for yourself? These anti-competitive behaviors are causing higher prices for consumers. That includes you.

The costs to consumers are why we're talking about this, and why, as a society, we try to police it.

[crimbles]

Not really. If something stops being convenient for me or a poor ROI I will stop using it. Hence why I now no longer use Amazon or any TV streaming services.

I don't have to participate in a market.

[max_]

I absolutely agree.

Free markets are a battle ground. Businesses should use what ever advantage they have over each other to get ahead.

This is why I am very against people that often beg regulators to come and reduce on the so called "unfair" business practices.

The free market is not some place where businesses gather together around a fire singing Kumbaya Or as brothers in arms breaking bread.

This confusion as to why businesses should be left to fight each other is what I mostly disagree with people on.

[smoldesu]

> Businesses should use what ever advantage they have over each other to get ahead.

Including illegal monopoly power? If we gave Ma Bell and Standard Oil free reign I don't think the free market would be any better because of it.

[dindobre]

The free market still has rules, it's not a complete anarchy. Regulators can often be incompetent or make rulings that distort the market, which is a problem in itself. What we should aim for is a market which is free within boundaries, with the aim of the boundaries to increase competition, if we can assume that competition equals good things for everyone.

[bearjaws]

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Anti-trust was started for a reason, we know how this ends long term, little competition and increased prices for everyone.

[gipp]

You don't have to have "sympathy" for either party to recognize what the just course of action is. Nor do the hypothetical actions of Spotify in the reverse situation affect it in any way

[crimbles]

The just course of action is both Apple and Spotify destroy their market and we go back to buying mp3s and FLAC files which aren't rent seeking.