Updating the Criteria for Web API Extended Access

[ThePodfather]

Hey, I created this thread to get your feedback on our blog post around changes to the Web API extended access criteria, which will take place on May 15th.

Please share any of your thoughts on this change in the comments below. All of your feedback will be reviewed and compiled so I can share directly with the S4D team.

Whilst I won’t be replying to individual pieces of feedback in this thread, please know that everything shared here will be read and considered. Any related threads or questions posted elsewhere on this topic will be merged here so everything is in one place.

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

Update:

• Sharing some clarification that developers with existing quota moda extensions will keep their extension if they are actively using the Web API and remain in compliance with our Developer Terms. This update only applies to new developers in Dev mode seeking extended access
• As outlined in our blog post, if you've submitted your application before May 15th, we are committing to reviewing your submission based on prior criteria, whether you hear from us before that date or not.
• The criteria for the new process can be found HERE.

[mmhz]

Hello,

I am an independent developer and passionate about music. I recently began building an app designed to help users explore their listening habits and gain unique insights from their Spotify data. I've had so many exciting ideas planned to enhance users' engagement and discovery. However, the newly updated developer's policy just made it impossible to do so, and it significantly limits the ability of solo developers like myself to grow and bring these ideas to life.

I was wondering if Spotify could consider introducing a middle-tier access level, allowing motivated developers to launch their apps to a higher audience initially, before scaling up to the full extended quota access. This would greatly support innovation and enable smaller developers like myself to prove their app's value while aligning with Spotify goals. 

[LarsW1]

As many did before I also wanted to state that the new terms kill the potential to develop an application as a startup/individual. The 250k User requirement is just crazy to me. 

If its about money, let us pay an additional fee to work with the API instead of killing it for good for individuals

[Realundo]

I repaired this problem already. And i wanna one more change for the access. Now im just using this bot for my python project.And its worknig on local now, but if you give me one more chance I will use this program in my other friends

[yaktam]

The developer and community response here feels lacking. Catering to vague complaints like “I don’t like playlists” without clear reasoning is frustrating. Offering devs and hobbyists useful tools only to abruptly revoke them citing “security” is a major letdown.

Instead of a blanket shutdown, why not implement reasonable limits? For example, restrict hobbyists to accessing only their own playlists. Something that keeps the door open for small developers.

A 250K MAU requirement is absurd—it’s practically unreachable for new apps still building traction. That’s more like a 25M MAU bar. How are small devs supposed to grow if the tools are locked away before their app even functions?

This approach risks alienating the dev community. I hope Spotify reconsiders and finds a balanced solution, because right now, it’s pushing away the very people who could innovate on the platform. A competitor with a more dev-friendly approach could easily step in.

[yaktam]

One more suggestion: please overhaul the documentation page. Create a dedicated section for extended access developers and a separate, concise one for hobbyists and smaller devs. The current setup is unclear and doesn’t reflect what little functionality we’re left with. It’s frustrating to navigate and feels like an afterthought for those of us with limited access.

Apologies for the heated tone—I’m just venting my disappointment. The current approach feels shortsighted and risks alienating the community. I hope these issues get addressed before more developers disengage.

[snaplist]

Hi Yaktam, 

Let's keep things respectful.

The community is proposing an alternate solution (intermediary quote mode) or a pricing tier. 

Spotify API access is free and thus a priviledge. Keeping that in mind, we're hoping to work constructively to find a solution that works for everyone. 

[yaktam]

I appreciate the effort to find solutions like an intermediary quote mode or a pricing tier. However, Spotify’s approach feels heavy-handed. Instead of blanket restrictions, they could explore options like limiting hobbyist access to personal playlists or adding a small fee for API access—something that doesn’t completely shut out small developers.

The 250K MAU threshold is unrealistic for new apps trying to gain traction. It’s frustrating to see Spotify react to issues with such broad measures, like removing API access or allowing vague "I don’t like it" playlist reports, without considering the impact on the community.

I’d argue that as paying subscribers, we’re already supporting the platform, and API access feels like part of that value. For every vocal critic like me, there are likely others quietly disengaging. I hope Spotify engages constructively with the community’s proposals and communicates a clear path forward.

Please keep us posted on any response from them.

[olunasahin]

"These thresholds make it impossible to start small. Going from 25 users in dev mode to 250k MAUs before qualifying for quota extension is not just unrealistic — it actively kills innovation. "

what could be the thinking behind? i cannot grasp it.

[Dancom]

How would this allow any new app to qualify at all?
I have been putting a month now into an app that gains insights into your listening habits and now I want to go live and opt for more than 25 users I read the API rules suddenly changed...
What a pity...

[SimonetDiego]

Which one please? Can you help me? 

[markpaulrobinso]

Will there be a response from Spotify at all here to any of these valid concerns?

I submitted my app before the deadline but I'm worried there might be something minor that could get me denied. Mark at TrackDrift dot com if you can help me! (my site isn't on TrackDrift.com yet but will look to move once approved!) 

[yaktam]

Oh, you’re waiting for Spotify to listen? Bless you.

Unless this ends up plastered all over Reddit, Snapchat, X, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, or lands smack in the middle of a New York Times op-ed, Washington Post exposé, or gets shouted out by some influencer with 12 million followers and a protein powder sponsorship—don’t hold your breath. Spotify’s about as responsive as a Magic 8-Ball glued shut.

They’ve got this adorable little "suggestion box," right? More like a digital landfill. Users toss in thoughtful ideas, and Spotify… well, they treat it like a black hole. Nothing escapes, and nobody inside seems to care. You’d have better luck whispering your request to a pigeon and hoping it lands on the CEO’s windowsill.

From where I’m standing—just a hobbyist, mind you—it looks like the company takes its lead from a board of directors with all the future vision of a kamikaze pilot in a blindfold. Honestly, the way they block access to their own metadata? It’s not just frustrating—it’s so mind-numbingly stupid it should be studied.

[SimonetDiego]

Hi everyone,

I’m the founder of iDisko, a soon-to-be-launched social music platform built entirely around Spotify. I wanted to share our perspective, because I believe our app is a case that clearly shows how small, serious developers can help Spotify grow — especially in driving Premium subscriptions.

iDisko is designed to enhance the music-listening experience by making it social and visual. Users appear on screen in video while listening to their Spotify music, each controlling their own music. They can connect, react, and interact — all while staying immersed in their own playlist.

But here’s the key point: the experience is significantly better for Spotify Premium users. That’s why we’re not only using Spotify’s API — we’re promoting the value of Premium directly inside our app.

We project reaching 1 million users within the next 3 years, and our target audience is international, young, and highly engaged — people who already use Spotify and are likely to upgrade once they discover this new interactive layer.

Unfortunately, like many here, we’re now blocked from applying for extended access because we haven’t launched publicly yet. We meet the legal structure requirements, have a clear monetization plan, and are already being backed by investors. What we’re missing is access — which limits our ability to even test with more than 25 users.

We’re not asking for a free pass. We’re asking for a constructive dialogue, or even a review-based early access model for small companies with a serious roadmap, real infrastructure, and a strong incentive to help Spotify grow.

If anyone at Spotify is reading this, I’d love to connect and explain how iDisko aligns with your goals. We’re building something fresh and scalable — and Spotify sits at the very heart of it.

Thanks to the community for raising these issues so respectfully — let’s hope there’s room for thoughtful exceptions and real partnership moving forward.

— Diego Simonet

Founder, iDisko

www.idisko.com

**bleep**

[snaplist]

Hello Again, 

The Snaplist Development Team received notice that our submission (made prior to the May 15th deadline) has been declined. The reason provided for the declination indicates a potential misunderstanding in how Spotify data is handled, specifically regarding the AI & LLM clause of the Spotify Developer Agreement. 

The Team is eager to add clarity in the hopes of a decision reevaluation, as Snaplist was architected with compliance at its core.

However, since the decision was made after the May 15th deadline, we're unable to locate any appeals or resubmission mechansim. Additional clarity surrounding appeals and decisions would be much appreciated. 

If possible, we would also really appreciate someone reaching out to us directly at support@snaplist<dot>me (snaplist.me).

With deep gatitude and concern, 

The Snaplist Development Team

https://snaplist.me

[beamo]

Hey Snaplist, could you give some more details about how your "quota extension" section of your Developer Dashboard looks? This has actually been my biggest fear (that there's no chance to resubmit, even for small issues, even if your original submission was before the May 15 deadline).

When my app was rejected previously (before the May 15 deadline), I could go to the "extension requests" section of my Developer Dashboard, and there was a "reapply" button (or some similar type word) at top of the dashboard, above the "History" section. Are you saying that button is now gone? The "Extension Request" part of the Dashboard just shows "History" (Request Type: Quota Extension, Status: Reviewed, etc) and that's it? So disappointing if so.

I was rejected once before the May 15 deadline, then (hopefully) fixed my problems and resubmitted before the final deadline. But was hoping that ppl who submitted before May 15 might get a one more chance to fix small errors/issues as long as they had submitted before the deadline. Totally agree with you that if it's a "one chance or you're out" situation that would be so extremely disappointing (especially given how vague and unhelpful the reasons are that Spotify gives for its rejections).

[donAndres]

Are there any updates? Something new from Spoitfy team?

[yaktam]

The only people that Spotify talks to, are the people that "show them the money." Ain't going to be any discussion about access to their metadata here. Not for people that are not "in the club." They NEVER, repeat NEVER post anything in here of value. It's more like a window onto a monkey cage for them.

The only people that help other users in here, are other users. The admins just look for naughty words, and delete posts they don't find tasteful. Point us to docs. Or "real" support. About as useful as Spotify's API for most of us right about now.

[ahaptelmanov]

Dear Spotify Partnerships Team,

I hope this message finds you well.

I'm reaching out to express my sincere disappointment upon learning about the recent changes to your application process, which now only accepts submissions from established organizations, effective May 15th, 2025. As an individual entrepreneur currently developing a promising startup, this update has been deeply disheartening.

Despite being in the early stages, I have been fully committed to launching a service that meets Spotify’s technical and commercial expectations. I’m even prepared to make the necessary investments—financial and operational—to ensure my service aligns with your platform’s standards. Unfortunately, the restriction against individual applications means I cannot even begin a conversation with your team or submit for consideration.

I respectfully urge you to consider the following:

Innovation often begins with individuals or small teams. Many successful digital platforms today started with solo founders or pre-incorporation prototypes.

I am ready to register my business and meet your requirements, but the current policy prevents any preliminary dialogue or feedback that could guide that process.

A rigid entry threshold may unintentionally discourage high-potential innovation, especially from under-resourced but highly capable developers.

Providing a path for early-stage startups or individuals to engage (even conditionally or in a sandbox environment) could foster deeper collaboration and more diverse use cases.

I fully understand the need for quality control and commercial readiness, and I respect Spotify’s desire to ensure all integrations deliver value to users. Still, I hope there might be room for flexibility, guidance, or an alternative path for passionate developers like myself who are striving to build something great with Spotify as a core component.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I would greatly appreciate any suggestions or next steps you could offer under the current policy framework.

[babydeveloper]

Can we at least have bpm data access via API? I do modern jive dance practice in my garage with my dance partner and we just want to see the bpm of songs we are playing on Spotify Desktop for Mac via a simple electron app I built. We are not a competitor to Spotify.

[Reemface]

Exactly! That is the only thing i need too! This could be included with the default track info so there is no optional api call needed.

bpm makes so much possible for example sync DMX light program together with the music. We don’t ask more than that.