A Win for Who Exactly?

a.k.a. The EU slapped Apple with a giant, streaming-related fine, but the biggest winners aren't artists, or even consumers. It's Spotify.

Musicians are fed up. When even the perpetually mild mannered James Blake is exasperatedly posting about the depressing economic realities of a music industry dominated by streaming and social media, it seems clear that the current system is broken. Blake may not be a superstar, but he’s no newcomer, nor is he someone whose work resides far outside the commercial mainstream. The guy literally has an album on the way with rapper Lil Yachty, and though he may have started in the relatively obscure world of UK bass music (more than a decade ago), he’s now someone who lives in LA, is ensconced in the major-label world and also happens to be in a long-term relationship with world-famous actress Jameela Jamil. If James Blake is frustrated with the status quo, it’s safe to assume that things are becoming positively dire for those acts who sit somewhere further down the industry ladder.

The issues Blake raised (e.g. low streaming payouts, the growing pressure to go viral, the declining value of actual music, the looming threat of AI) have all been discussed ad nauseam, to a point where even many of the most engaged music fans and industry observers have grown bored with these topics. It’s not news that most musicians are struggling, or that their situation appears to be getting a little bit worse with each passing year, and yet, even those consumers who empathize with their plight don’t seem terribly motivated to do much about it. Very little in the way of real solidarity exists between artists and the listening public, especially during a time when the latter group is getting such a fantastic deal. With streaming granting them free or very cheap access to a virtually endless well of music, and the endless scroll of social media filling the rest of their free time with petty conflict and bargain-basement dopamine hits, it’s highly unlikely that consumers will be the driving force behind any improvements in artists’ working conditions.

Improvements are even less likely to come from the industry’s tech overlords, who are already in cahoots with the major labels and generally see music as just another page in their sprawling content portfolios. Artistry isn’t on these companies’ priority list, and while a torrent of criticism in recent years has prompted them to pay lip service to the sustainability concerns of working musicians, it rarely feels all that genuine. Just last week, Spotify CEO and co-founder Daniel Ek posted a video on Instagram in which he largely brushed off complaints about his company’s low payout rates, drawing a comparison between music and professional sports that effectively implied that artists who aren’t earning adequate money simply aren’t good enough to be in the industry’s metaphorical big leagues. The man seems to legitimately think of Spotify as a force for good, and his fellow CEOs all appear to feel the same about their own platforms, routinely touting their growth and popularity as signs that they are serving the public interest.

So if the music industry—which, for all intents and purposes, is now largely an extension of the tech industry—can’t be trusted to adequately police itself, and consumers won’t pressure them to change (at least not in a way that actually helps artists), is there anyone left who could potentially intervene? Government would be the obvious answer, and while scattered efforts, such as the UK Parliament’s inquiry into the economics of music streaming and US Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib’s proposed resolution to create a new streaming royalty, have been made, they have yet to yield much in the way of real-world results. (Editor’s Note: One day after this article was published, Tlaib renewed her push, joining Congressman Jamaal Bowman in introducing the Living Wage for Musicians Act, a piece of proposed legislation developed in conjunction with United Musicians and Allied Workers. That group has launched an online petition to support the bill.) The US Congress’ various hearings on social media in recent years have arguably been even less effective, often doing little more than providing politicians with a chance to grandstand in front of the cameras, or demonstrate their general ignorance of how these platforms actually work.

Yesterday, however, the European Union took what looked like bold action, fining Apple €1.8 billion for its moves to limit competition from other music streaming platforms. The company’s App Store—which for years has been broadly criticized for taking a 30% commission on all app sales and in-app purchases—was cited as the primary culprit, and considering that the fine was originally expected to be in the neighborhood of €500 million, one might assume that the EU has finally gotten serious about regulating the tech sector. Levying a nearly €2 billion fine does more than just punish Apple. It sends a message to tech firms everywhere that there’s a new sheriff in town.

Unfortunately though, that sheriff doesn’t appear to be all that interested in the welfare of artists either.