Every day we offer FREE licensed software you’d have to buy otherwise.

TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter 2.7.7 (Win&Mac) Giveaway
$39.95
EXPIRED

Giveaway of the day — TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter 2.7.7 (Win&Mac)

Enjoy Spotify music offline on any device!
$39.95 EXPIRED
User rating: 58 (85%) 10 (15%) 82 comments

TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter 2.7.7 (Win&Mac) was available as a giveaway on October 11, 2019!

Today Giveaway of the Day
$20.00
free today
Distinguish your folders quickly by any color!

TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter can record Spotify songs, albums and playlists with either Spotify free or Spotify Premium, save as MP3, M4A, WAV or FLAC, preserve all ID3 tags like song title, album, artist, artwork, etc., sort output files into folders by artist or album. The program helps any Spotify user enjoy their favorite songs on iOS, Android, Kindle Fire, iPod Nano/Shuffle, Sony Walkman or any other MP3 player.

Please note: the program includes 1 year subscription. Free upgrades are allowed during this period.

System Requirements:

Windows 7/ 8/ 8.1, 10 (x32/x64), CPU: 1G Hz processor or above, Monitor: Monitor with 1024x768 pixels or higher resolution, RAM: 512MB or higher of RAM, Spotify client must be installed; Mac 10.9.5 (Mavericks), 10.10 (Yosemite), 10.11 (El Capitan), 10.12 (Sierra), 10.13 (High Sierra), 10.14 (Mojave), CPU: 1G Hz processor or above, Monitor: Monitor with 1024x768 pixels or higher resolution, RAM: 512MB or higher of RAM, Spotify application must be installed

Publisher:

TuneKeep Software

Homepage:

https://www.tunekeep.com/spotify-music-converter/

File Size:

29.3 MB

Price:

$39.95

GIVEAWAY download basket

Developed by Online Media Technologies Ltd.
Developed by Web Solution Mart
Developed by Head Document Tool Software, Inc.
Developed by Tomasen

Comments on TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter 2.7.7 (Win&Mac)

Thank you for voting!
Please add a comment explaining the reason behind your vote.
#19

Am I the only one to notice that all the music is hideously clipped? I nearly blew the speakers on my hi-fi when I burnt a sample track to a CD.

Reply   |   Comment by Prof Quatermass  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#18

Using a screen reader? do not bother like most windows 10 optimized programs it will not work :(

Reply   |   Comment by FireBringer77  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)
#17

Not sure what I'm doing wrong , but I do have a paid version of Spotify, Win10, downloaded and installed, said it registered successfully, but will not go past 13 songs. FAQs not helpful. I'm pretty sure I actually purchased this software a year or so ago and forgot about it, but had the same problem then.

After it gets to a certain number of songs, the 0% never goes away. I've tried with about 20 songs and with about 10 and no luck. Any ideas?

Reply   |   Comment by Robin Mathers  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+3)

Robin Mathers,

This is the staff from TuneKeep Sofware official support team, sorry for the inconvenience.

You can email the support team of TuneKeep Sofware: support@tunekeep.com to get help.

Thanks for your comment.

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#16

Managed to install the software. Dragged an album across and added it to the conversion list. But as soon as I press the Convert button, a pop up box appears and tells me "Can not find Spotify" Please download and install Spotify at first." Not sure what I am doing wrong as Spotify is open and I dragged the music across from Spotify with no problem.

Reply   |   Comment by CMorgan  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

CMorgan,

Install Spotify desktop PROGRAM, not just the Windows 10-ish "app".
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  25 days ago  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#15

Software downloaded, installed and registered seamlessly. It's easy to use and works as promised. Excellent giveaway, developers and GOTD, thanks.

Reply   |   Comment by KLacey  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)
#14

Well, it's a mixed bag. I've gotten good, uncertain, and bad results. First, the good: Unlike recent similar giveaway AudFree Spotify Music Converter, TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter WILL grab an entire album and (in Spotify Free) apparently Pause recording during a commercial break, and then resume (whereas AudFree will record the commercial as part of a song). Additionally, it allowed me 320 BPS instead of the usual 256, which I very much appreciated. I also apprecieated the fact that it allowed the Track number (with leading zeroes!) to be attached as a prefix to the filenames. It also correctly input Title, Artist, Album, Year, Track#, Disk#, and a picture of the album cover in the metadata. Not Genre or "Album Artist," but apparently nobody does that anyway. (I'm curious what it might do with the "too long title names" you sometimes get with Classical music recordings, but that test will have to wait for another day). Now, the Uncertain: I had a couple of "blatt" sounds (like less than a second) in my initial playback of the album using Windows Media Player. One of them would probably have coincided with where I would normally get a commercial break (somewhere afterthe "10 minute mark" following a series of played songs. And after the song finished, I received an error from Media Player - that error showed up twice - once each in two difference songs. However, I had problems re-creating it - so maybe electrical interference on my end (?) Later, when attempting to play a series or even just one song, Windows Media Player hung. "Groove" player, however had no trouble. Same problem after rebooting my machine. However, I then noted that OTHER, previously recorded music was having the same problem with Win Media Player (and I DID have a MS update Tuesday...) I killed Media Player using Task Manager, and now everything WILL play again (but a reboot should have done the same thing)- so it's weird. Now the bad. I attempted to download another album. The TuneKeep songs materialized on the screen, and I clicked Convert - the song took a very long time to come up in Spotify (The spotify song "playing" had been from the previous download, so I did expect some delay), and then it started "playing" in Spotify. I kept waiting and waiting, but after a minute and a half, and no progress on TuneKeep, I hit stop on TuneKeep, and then proceeded to cancel all 6 of the scheduled songs. I set the Spotify "current spot in the recording" back to the beginning of the first song, re-imported the album into TuneKeep and hit convert, and the Tunekeep/Spotify combination crashed, producing a .dmp file. No songs for this album were downloaded, although the Artist/Album directories had been created. So. I think this is VERY CLOSE to being an excellent product, and I intend to use it more and try and figure out if there's a reliable work-around for the problems I have experienced, but I think it still needs a bit of work before it is ready for the real world. Still, an excellent offering to GOTD. Thanks.

Reply   |   Comment by RiverboatSam  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+1)
#13

The window is oversized, not resizeable nor does it have a "maximize" to window button nor can it be snapped to maximize to screen in Windows 10. My screen resolution is 1920x1080

Thumbs down because of this.

Reply   |   Comment by JMSB  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-4)
#12

well i installed it and everything was going fine, but when i dragged the song from spotify to it, well it said "try to install spotify first" i don't understand what i am doing wrong here.

Reply   |   Comment by Vikrant  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+2)

me too, after drag & drop a song and clicking "convert" there is a message box: "can not find spotify - please download and install spotify at first". But spotify itself is installed and working correctly.

Reply   |   Comment by Markus  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+1)

Markus, Did you install it from the Windows 10 Store or through an installer? I've noticed it made a difference on one program.

Reply   |   Comment by Michael Summerset  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Vikrant , as a general rule if your spotify converter/downloader/ripper is a desktop program i.e. is installed via an .MSI or .EXE it will only interface with a desktop client program.

Generally speaking desktop programs do not ever interact with windows store derived apps. e.g. Skype and Spotify installed from the Windows store will not be able to be detected by skype call recorders or spotify downloaders you can download from other websites. You will have to install the respective desktop programs.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+1)

problem solved! was using spotify with browser only, but you have to install the spotify app for windows if you want to use it with tunekeep!

Reply   |   Comment by Markus  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Hi Vikrant,

This is the staff from TuneKeep Sofware official support team, sorry for the inconvenience.

Do you install the latest version of Spotify? If not, please download and install the latest version of Spotify, it may help to solve your problem.

If you are using the latest version of Spotify, please confirm if it is the Microsoft Store version, you can download and install it from Microsoft Store.

You can also try to download the standalone version of Spotify if the problem still exists after trying the solutions above.

Please contact the support team of TunrKeep Software via support@tunekeep.com to get help.

Thanks for your comment.

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

I had the same issue. Bitdefender was blocking it and Tunekeeper needed to be added to the app exception list. Hope that helps.

Reply   |   Comment by gb  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Michael Summerset, i did it from an installer and it works perfect

Reply   |   Comment by Markus  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Mason Harwood, well i have the latest spotify and its a standalone installation so i have no clue what i am doing wrong here.

Reply   |   Comment by Vikrant Bhagat  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

gb, i see its possible i tried to add it on the list but i can't seem to add it, sorry i need some help with this, i am sure its something silly.

Reply   |   Comment by Vikrant Bhagat  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

gb, an update i found out that bitdefender had quaranteened it, seems like its working now thank you so much :) works amazing!

Reply   |   Comment by Vikrant Bhagat  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Vikrant Bhagat, Glad it's working!

Reply   |   Comment by gb  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#11

Wow it really works and everything comes out perfect'

Reply   |   Comment by Keith Phelps  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-11)
#10

Help does not work and I cannot figure out how to simply click and drag with spotify and this app. Laugh all you want, but I don't get it. How do I get a playlist link FROM spotify to put into this application. Call me dumb, but I don't get it.

Reply   |   Comment by Exploro  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+8)

Okay, so now that I figured out how to drag and drop the results are "unknown error" for the first several downloads. Not a promising beginning. Ideas? Thanks.

Reply   |   Comment by Exploro  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+4)

Exploro, on desktop spotify client right click on the spotify playlist or song in question and choose "Share" then "Copy Spotify URI"

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Hi Exploro,

This is the staff from TuneKeep Sofware official support team, sorry for the inconvenience.

You can email the support team of TuneKeep Sofware: support@tunekeep.com to get help.

Thanks for your comment.

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#9

It doesn´t work for me at all, on Win 8.1 x64.

Installs correctly, but as soon as I add any song it stays at 0% forever.

May be related to the fact an older version of Spotify, since I like the interface much better. (1.0.62.508) Which makes me think if Spotify changes anything and this doesn´t update...

Anyway, promising, but useless for me.

Cheers

Reply   |   Comment by andario  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+6)

Hi andario,

This is the staff from TuneKeep Sofware official support team, sorry for the inconvenience.

You can email the support team of TuneKeep Sofware: support@tunekeep.com to get help.

Thanks for your comment.

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#8

Is there any difference between the GOTD version and the one offered on their site page? Also, this one lists a one year license, and didnt see that on the web page version,..but maybe overlooked??

Reply   |   Comment by Eddie L  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+1)

Eddie L, This type of product that has an ongoing electronic counter measure war with the service it pirates downloads from so it makes sense to have an ongoing mantanance subscription for since when Spotify changes something to try and break these unauthorised downloaders the developers must expend dev hours determining what changed to break the downloader and adapt to it.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+1)

Eddie L,

This is the staff from TuneKeep Sofware official support team, nice to see your comment.

There are no differences between the GOTD version and the one offered on our page.

We do not sell the 1 Year license that GOTD is providing and the software is totally the same on both websites, please feel free to download, purchase and use.

If you have further questions, please email the support team of TuneKeep Sofware for help.
Email address: support@tunekeep.com

Thanks for your comment.

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

TK,

"... TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter ... is actually recording ..." -- staff from TuneKeep Software official support team

Not "pirating", where the currently majority definition is "... use or reproduce ( another's work ) for profit without permission, usually in contravention of patent or copyright ...".

GOTD offering, and use of GOTD offering as intended are not "pirating".
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  25 days ago  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)

Peter Blaise, "for profit" is added by those who like to pirate for personal benefit... like traditional pirates did... gaining other peoples valuables and other posessions.
And making an uathorised duplication of copyrighten work that explicitly prohibits unathorised reproduction or states all rights reserved is by definition of the word to "pirate", pirating. You can redefine words to your own satisfaction if you like, call black, white... take something that does not belong to you by virtue of permision not given to you just because you feel no one is watching in the privacy of your own home is the same as if any memeber of the public visits you. Then you believing you you can do anything you like in your own home, have the right to take their posessions or ideas without their permission and use them for your own enjoyment... that would still be theft even if you did not sell the idea as your own or sell the stolen property for cash. same principle as pirating.
The sole purpose of that particular giveaway software is to pirate spotify streamed content for either personal or commercial benefit it does not require you to get the permission of the service or the rights holder because it is designed just to pirate the content aka steal unathorised duplications or as is otherwised called in common parlence unauthorised reproductions. If one does use it for commercial benefit then in addition to infringing the music rights holders copyrights you'd be infringing spotifys gated service terms of service and GAOTD term strictly personal usage. But with strictly personal pirating you'd just be infringing the copyrights holders rights and spotifys terms of service... either way pirating the content. If I watch a blue ray movie on my TV and record it with a camcorder or my smartphone and then freely redistibute that recording of the movie, that is a pirate copy of the movie it is not officially sanctioned it was not an authorised reproduction I do not have to sell it just doing the recording itself makes it a pirate copy of the movie before anything is done with it, shared or watched or sold. It is be virtue of its origin a pirated copy of the movie. Makes no differnce if I did it at home or in the cinema appart from it would be easier to get caught and stopped pirating the movie in the cinema.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  24 days ago  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

.
[ TK ], why would anyone need to hide from the owner of copyright property when they make copies at home - there is nothing wrong with copying stuff in your own home, nothing to hide?

All that other stuff could happen via any source, like first buying CDs at Target - totally meaningless here at GOTD.

Thanks for exploring this.
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  23 days ago  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#7

I can record any sound coming out from the computer without a program like this. Just get any good free audio program like Audacity. That's all.

Reply   |   Comment by Luis  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+1)

Luis, I thought with "TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter" you listen to a online radio (or whatever) and converts the Spotify songs in the same time. You dont need to play the hole song and record it like you do with Audacity ;)

Reply   |   Comment by Dre  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Hi Luis,

This is the staff from TuneKeep Software official support team, nice to see your comment.

TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter can batch convert/download (as you know it is actually recording) Spotify songs in a short time and keep all the ID3 tags and metadata AUTOMATICALLY.

Compared to other free audio programs, our advantage is faster and more convenient, and the audio quality is better. And our software is small and supports offline use, you can learn more information on our page.
https://www.tunekeep.com/spotify-music-converter/

Thanks for your comment.

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#6

Need help with entering the password. I can see the key icon in the terminal... but I can't see the password while typing and/or I have tried to copy%paste the password but this also didn't work for me :(

Reply   |   Comment by Dre  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)

Dre, try removing the program and re-install. The same happened to me however, after a second install all was OK.

Reply   |   Comment by Andy  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+1)

Hi Dre,

This is the staff from TuneKeep Sofware official support team, sorry for the inconvenience.

You can email the support team of TuneKeep Sofware: support@tunekeep.com to get help.

Thanks for your comment.

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#5

"Failed install key" - will not accept the serial given, no matter how I do it

Reply   |   Comment by Phil  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+3)

Hi Phil,

This is the staff from TuneKeep Sofware official support team, sorry for the inconvenience.

You can email the support team of TuneKeep Sofware: support@tunekeep.com to get help.

Thanks for your comment.

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#4

Not working on my macOS Catalina. Could not find the virtual audio device.

Reply   |   Comment by Franco  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-2)

After restarting, now it is working

Reply   |   Comment by Franco  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)
#3

The program is actually recording Spotify song playback at the background, but I guess this is what all kinds of Spotify converters do. The 5X speed is really nice. The output files are pretty good and the ID3 tags are kept as advertised.
It's convenient to download an album or a playlist, however, when downloading, you should not move your mouse, otherwise the conversion may fail, so you can't do other things at the same time. This is the disadvantage.

In total, it's nice and easy-to-use. I would give my score at 4.5 of 5.

Reply   |   Comment by Carol  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+20)

Hi Carol,

This is the staff from TuneKeep Software official support team, nice to see your comment.

Actually, the comment you left is not entirely correct. When downloading, users are allowed to move their mouse.

Only if you move your mouse and get to use other programs will cause a failure to the conversion.

So, please note that DO NOT use other programs during the conversion to keep the converter work successfully.

Thanks for your comment!

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
#2

You should really try this converter, I no longer need a Spotify Premium to download songs on it.

Reply   |   Comment by Pau Garcia  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-9)

Pau Garcia, right but Premium has a much higher stream bitrate (320Kbits/sec) than a free a account has, aside from the other Premium features. So you get only 96Kbits/sec (mobile) - 160Kbits/sec (desktop) bitrate and that won't change no matter what the bitrate (bigger than that) of the actual output file may be.

Reply   |   Comment by senzai6293  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+11)
#1

QUESTION - you need to agree to Spotify terms to listen to the music they provide, right? Meaning - free listening, ads, no downloading, unless you pay for the premium version.
SO, how can this program legal if it's violatingthe agreement between the customers and the company?

Or maybe, I'm thinking wrong? Can somebody help me to understand this?

Thank you in advance.

Reply   |   Comment by Gahi  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+12)

Gahi, it's using sound recording, I guess there is no problem...

Reply   |   Comment by Carol  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-9)

Gahi, Your question is good, but it should be answered by the developer. There is legal concern. I think with the monthly subscription I pay the royalties and the service. I think the breach of contract is real.

Reply   |   Comment by vadnaygy  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-4)

Carol,

"TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter"
Music recording and music conversion are not the same.

"Losslessly download Spotify songs, albums & playlists offline as MP3, M4A, WAV or FLAC"
Download and not recording.

Reply   |   Comment by vadnaygy  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+5)

In response to [ Gahi ],

No contract can compromise your independent right to do whatever you want with whatever copyright material arrives in your home - copy it and repurpose it and time-shift it and re-record it and do whatever in your own home ( just don't re-publish it, that's another topic ).

The premium relationship with any copyright owner may included additional features and benefits that you can provide for yourself, such as reading a book out loud to your child, even though the audio performance of that book is also available from the copyright owner - you could buy their premium audio version of that book, or make your own for use in home, including live performance in your home.

"Copy" wise, you cannot even hear Spotify unless a copy of the music was not already made somewhere inside your computer, and that copy inside your computer is yours to do with as you wish ... inside your home.

Almost all legal prosecutions are for re-publishing, or occasionally against a code cracker, but never ever against anyone who merely receives copyright works inside their home, especially from a paid source.

There is absolutely nothing legally prosecutable in using this software.
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+27)

Peter Blaise,
I like the way you describe things and you're correct as you personally can do what ever you want to with copyright material as long as you don't publish it.
I've heard of people cutting certain words they don't like out of songs.
I use to record off the radio on to cassette tape rather than buy pre-recorded cassettes of certain musical groups. Many others did the same. Some radio stations would play a complete album.
And how many people record there favourite bits from a TV series and upload this to YouTube.

Reply   |   Comment by Brian  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-2)

vadnaygy,

The website owner uses the word "download" to describe the features, this may be only a way to attract users, though, somehow it may be misleading. However, I have tried the program and I confirmed that it's recording.

I believe that most of Spotify converters, Spotify downloaders, etc. are recording the song played in the background. Otherwise, there is no need to launch and run Spotify application during the so-called downloading.

Reply   |   Comment by Carol  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Brian, actualy, I've made a "Top 10 cartoon openings" clip on YT - 30 years old openings from public televisions, just for fun. Nothing more. YT made me delete it. The same with a music video when I mixed scenes from a movie with a Japanese song. I really don't understand why I'm not allowed to share such things as a kind of fan art, but...

Reply   |   Comment by Gahi  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Peter Blaise, hmm, I KINDA understand this, but as an user I'm agreeing to terms of Spotify. So if I get this right - I can agree not to have their music offline (unless I pay for premium) and then do not care about my own agree as long as I'm doing it home?

Reply   |   Comment by Gahi  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)

Peter Blaise, here we go again.... you are perverting a USA court judgment made based upon obsolete legislation and also based upon unsolicited broadcasting by radio and TV broadcast stations whereby the domestic user did not enter into a bilateral contract and agree to abide by specific terms of service.

You cannot legally do what you want with any IP property in your own home. You choose to pervert the obsolete judgments that way due to an amoralistic outlook on your actions.

If you can rationalise them to yourself and the probability of being castigated or detected breaking the bilateral contracts with service providers you have agreed to not abuse their conditions but do abuse their conditions of use, you will do so, and preach such unathorised or prohibited activities. I stopped debating this with you on the last unathorised content downloading product giveaway because the giveaway was over and you were clearly viewing the legal status in a way that suits your own personal amorality and not the true contractual legal obligations under EU and USA current copyright and contract law.

Anyone following the legal advice Peter Blaise has given even though he is not a lawyer in any jusrisdiction feel free to sue him for losses if based upon his advice/opinion they get their account banned on any streaming service they agreed to not do unathorised downloads or use unathorised 3rd party software to access the service... e.g. their youtube accounts and any subscriber base and ad-revinue or their istore accounts and apps and song content purchasses or their spotify accounts and playlists etc. You may need to get a court order to compel GAOTD to release his real email address but their privacy agreement does allow for that :-)

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)

Carol, I believe that these tools use the spotify desktop program to interface with the Spotify service, obtaining meta-data of the tracks and the downloaded stream. I do not believe they record the played track behind the scenes as such but capture the digital stream as is and so can obtain it at a faster rate than playing it at normal speed. I believe the converter spawns the spotify desktop program virtulising whatever it needs to to get at whatever data it needs to...

Spotify could probably embed something like Themidia code protection into their desktop client to detect an unathorised parent process and decline to play anything if detected... but then the unauthorised converter could spoof the apearance of an anti-virus programs heuristics engine instead and then Spotify could not afford to have end users complaining "why do I have to turn off my Antimalware program just to use spotify desktop client?"... Electronic countermeasures are a right pain if a company is drawn into such escelating wars by content pirates. These sort of escelating content control wars were rife in the 20th century with subscription based analogue satellite TV services using smart cards to control access to their services and bands of hackers sniffing codes to regain unathorised access to the services contents.. The Sat TV operators impetus for maintaining control being that they pay a given per subscriber cost to the rights owners and if they did not protect their access control mechanisims so only the known subscribers had access the potential royalties costs could skyrocket to many times the per-subscriber costs. This is also the reason that giveawayoftheday.com developped the Themidia powered setup.exe/setup.gcd installer wrapper to protect the content providers IP rights and preserve their existing business model.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Gahi, There are certain global copyright exceptions where excerpts are permitted for commentary on the content and debate on the content etc. Under UK legislation there is a wikipedia subsection on this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_United_Kingdom#Fair_dealing_and_other_exceptions BUT youtube have the right to restrict the posting of content beyond what copyright law requires under their terms and conditions if they so wish but if you include a disclaimer on your animations inviting intelelctual and cultural debate on the included content and specifying the content excerpts are being composed and published specificaly for those purposes you'd have a chance at being allowed to keep the content up provided no DMCA takedown notice had been received from a rights owner... at which point you'd likely need to retain legal council and use the courts to enforce your fair use rights of excerpts.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)

Brian, What Peter preaches is not inaccordance with any law of any land that I am aware of but his own personal rationalisations. Here in UK there was a fair use provision for time shifted viewing of broadcast content whereby we were allowed to make temporary recordings onto video or audio tapes as long as we did not keep them indefinatly for archival purposes the specified permitted period was upto 2 weeks but it was practically unenforcable but it was the law of the land and when BBC came to want to digitise many of their old programs recordings they had to rely on some prolific video tape archives by certain famous people that had illegally archived thousands of hours of old TV programs that BBC never recorded or recorded for broadcast and then to save video tape costs , recorded over the previous episode of the program so the original recording was lost forever... The documentary that described this drive to digitise old BBC content byt the BBC did mention that the celebrties that did the illegal archiving of the broadcasts where technically breaking the law by building the personal acrhive but were not prosicuted because it was a valuable resource and the BBC gratefully digitised the VHS recordings. You may recall that most radio DJ's would talk over the begining and ends of tracks to spoil the illegal recordings of broadcast tracks...

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+1)

Hi Gahi,

This is the staff form the official support team of TuneKeep Software.

TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter is actually using recording technology to record audio from Spotify, so it is totally legal when using the software.

Besides, Spotify Music Converter is a home edition for personal use only, we do not recommend users to re-publish or re-sell the converted/downloaded files in any way.

If you have further questions about this, please contact suport@tunekeep.com to get answers.

Thank you for your comment.

Reply   |   Comment by Mason Harwood  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

.
Yes, [ Gahi ],

TOS are not negotiated.

So no matter what they say, only the legally applicable terms apply.

They can not deny your right to do whatever you want with the goods and services you receive from them when you are in your own home.

Including time shifting.

Time shifting is shifting the time you listen to the songs.

That is, you receive them now, and listen later.

By using a local in-home copy.

That is what this software makes easy for you - making an in-hone copy for you to listen later.
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Gahi, Yes, it would be illegal in many countries, as the Music is licensed on terms that wouldn't allow this. (I believe it would be covered by the DMCA in the U.S., for example.) It's very unlikely anyone would come after you if you weren't redistributing the music. I'm going to pass though.

Reply   |   Comment by JohnL  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Peter Blaise, time shifting fair use is for scheduled broadcasts NOT ad-hock streaming services and does not apply to spotify or youtube or any other non-scheduled streaming service. Also time shifting fair use doctrine does not permit or allow for making a perminant copy for personal or other reuse. Time shifting is purely that... record a scheduled broadcast that you cannot view or listen to at that time so you can view or listen to it at a more convenient time, after which you are expected/required to delete the temporary copy you made. Why do you pretend to not understand the law you twist and half quote and misrepresent. Regarding service contracts that are not negotiated... none of these services are essential for life, you are not forced to agree to their terms because they are needed to live! If you are discoverd in breach of the terms of service and have your access terminated and you really believe that their terms of use are illegal you will have to privately take them to court and prove your opinion, if you don't you will lose access to the service and probably not be entitiled to a refund either. Reprocussions are not always you being taken to court but also you having to take a service to court because of your actions that you think you are entitled to do but they say you are not entitled to do with their private gated service.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)

Mason Harwood, so you are making an unathorised reproduction of copyrighted content and making money from providing that service.. in UK you would be prosicuted and your product banned from sale like other products designed solely to enable the making copies of copyright protected content without offical permission. Streaming network protocols like those used by spotify or youtube, as opposed to download protocols such as http and https, they are DRM technologies and recording the audio stream in any way and converting that to a stand alone media file is defeating the DRM technlogy which makes your product in breach of USA DMCA and the current UK Copyright, Designs and Patents act. There used to be a loophole that a rights managment cicumventing device could be sold in UK IF it had a legitimate use in addition to the rights managment defeating function but that loophole was eradicated around a decade od two ago. But your program does not have any other use appart from ripping Spotify streamed audio and presumably meta-data from the service in an unauthorised manner depriving them of premium subscriber revinue and the necesary play statistics they need to rightfully determine which artists are being listend to and which artists should receive the particular per - listener royalty payment. It is services like yours that makes it impossible for Spotify to properly calculate the royalties they owe to artists as well as denying Spotify their legit ad-revinue when the ripped content you provide is played offline indefinatly without the artists or rights owners receiving any further royalties.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)

TK,
I still don't know how people are able to upload bits from TV programs to YouTube and have it stay on YouTube for 3 years or more. Maybe not copyright for everyone.

Reply   |   Comment by Brian  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+2)

[ TK ] wrote: "... after which you are expected/required to delete the temporary copy you made ..."

Entering the world of fairy tales ... and for what, trying to give people nightmares?

Lemme review the US Supreme Court decision for "... after which you are expected/required to delete the temporary copy you made ..."

Nothing like thinking that anyone legislates or adjudicates a law that cannot be enforced, and there is no one to enforce it, no one to inspect what they expect, and no way to identify or prosecute ... because there can be no prohibitions, and so there are not even imaginary prohibitions, on what anyone does with copyright material in their own home.

How does anyone even delete the contents of a Sony Betamax tape?

Does anyone really think there were suddenly a legal demand that all video recorders have an erase head so it self-erased immediately as you watched the playback of a prior recording?

Imagine that - all your family vacations wiped out because your commercial videotape player believed [ TK ] and erased any playback immediately as you watches and the tape moved past the play head as was erased according to [ TK ]'s universe of fear.

Look I appreciate everyone's earnestness, but no, there is absolutely no limit on what anyone can do with any copyright work that arrives in their home.

Got a book?

Read it out loud - no need to buy the audio version, or fear that you will be arrested for an unpermissioned performance.

Read it 100 times to your kids and grandkids - no need to purchase 100 additional performance rights in your own home, no need for fear of behaving against the law in your own home.

Even record your reading for when you are old and blind, or gone, so your kids can listen to you once again and remember you - again, no need to purchase additional copies, no need to fear breaking any law by doing whatever you want to with copyright works in your own home.

Shred the book into confetti if you want to.

Burn it for fuel if you want to.

Make copies with your scanner and printer, hundreds of pages, use them for wallpaper, toilet paper, whatever, and do not fear the police will arrest you and accuse you of wiping your butt with copies T-Rump's poetry.

Absolutely no one is limited by other people's ( lack of ) imagination.

No one said TOS are illegal, just that they have no legal import beyond their purview, no matter what they claim ( like car makers claiming you cannot change your own oil or the warranty is void - it's not, no matter what they say ).

"Often" in the previous post is baseless and unsupportable.

Absolutely no one has been taken to court over time-shifting in their own home, no one has been prosecuted for doing anything they want to with copyright material that arrives in their home, no matter how it arrived.

Some folks here have a paranoia complex, but please, web-search everything they wrote, and everything I wrote, and look for any legal cases to support their contentions, please.

Enjoy the software offerings from GOTD without fear.
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

[ Brian ],

Copyright owners are grateful for free publicity from their fans.

Copyright owners often make free and freely distributed copies available, even digital where the copies can them become endless - it's called marketing, and it diminished their competition at least, a win win win win for them.

And "bits" are "fair use", look it up.
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (+1)

Give it up, [ TK ], you couldn't be more wrong and more sue-sue-sue lawyerly gobbledygook doomsday doublespeak and incendiary innuendo "Spotify can't calculate royalties if people listen later or twice without them knowing" ...

... you whine like horse-whip makers did when cars replaced horses.

Any licensed distributor of copyright material has no more control or responsibility to pay royalties on anything but the individual sale, and it is not their job to track what a person does with their own private in-home copy.

I buy a book, CD, download an MP3, the sale is done, if I never read or listen, if I read or listen 1,000 times, if I give it away, it's none of their business.

Like a Sony Betamax machine, TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter software is just a tool - what people do with them in their own home is sacrosanct and absolutely none of the copyright holder's business, ever, ever, ever, and is certainly not the responsibility of the licensed copyright distributor, who's job is done at the first delivery.

[ TK ], you sound like you are whining about artists not getting their due - yell at Spotify for their horrible treatment of artists, do not yell at TuneKeep, and do not yell at us here on GOTD.

Even illegal resharing does not deny a sale, because the majority of sharing is to places where the distributors do not distribute because they don't like the distribution terms - it's the distributors who deny artists their royalties by such self-serving self-dealing.

Re-listening to one's own copy in home does not deny anyone any income - you are spouting really bad propaganda from distributor's lawyers - if you want to re-read that book, even if you just want to turn back a few pages and review what you just read to get the presentation clear in your mind, you have to pay for another performance copyright version of that book - no, [ TK ], you do not, not now, not ever, not digital, not CD, not paper.

I just paid full retail for a digital presentation of an album, and I copied it to phone, multimedia-player, CD, and of course backup to multiple computers.

And you claim that the people who designed the software I use to do that are breaking the law.

Start with Microsoft's own DOS [ copy ] command.

Do you want Microsoft office address to turn them in to the law to prosecute Microsoft for their DOS [ copy ] command?

C'mon, folks, do not be afraid of any GOTD software as being illegal itself, do not be afraid of the use of the software as intended as if it could possibly be illegal.

GOTD is a great venue for developers and those of us here who help them by giving useful feedback.

Don't let [ TK ] scare you and drive you away from GOTD.
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

No, [ TK ], "fair use" is a description of re-publishing other people's copyright work without prior permission.

"Fair use" has nothing to do with making copies for in-home re-use.

Please look stuff up.

And please stop trying to scare GOTD vendors and users with your uninformed scare tactics as of you were a spokesperson for a lawyer-firm trying to garner favor with Warner Brothers, as if you were fishing for a prosecutorial contract as their new guard dog and lobbyist.

GOTD software is legal itself, and of course legal to use as intended.

GOTD is great, folks, [ TK ] ... is a bit of a scaredy-cat misleader.

.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Peter Blaise, to delete a betamax or VHS recording or DVD-RW disc or DVR hard drive recording you simply record over it! Are you deliberatly trying to create problems when none exist? Where you not alive when Betamax and VHS and audio tapes were in common use? You keep going on about obsolete US supreme court decisions about cases that have nothing to do with the current day or the comments you are responding to. I am talking about a different jurisdiction and referring to much more modern and restrictive legislation that supersede ALL your attempts to self justify. When ANY legal case is brought by any claimant they first decide which statute is the most appropriate for their complaint and holds the best compromise of chances of winning the case by being provable and not being hog-tied by previous legal precedences in that jurisdiction and potential for sufficient redress for the infraction. Not all copyright infringement claims are specifically about unauthorised reproduction but certain legislation (DMCA) IN THE USA specifically prohibits the defeating of DRM in all forms and trumps the obsolete supreme courts rulings you cling onto so passionately. No one is trying to scaremonger anyone away from GAOTD site, that is your new fake news propaganda? Stick to the facts, READ THE CURRENT LEGISLATION YOURSELF! If you are willing to risk losing your access to various online services that are gated by contracts and accounts feel free to do so but don't expect to preach the activity of pirating streaming services is legal and risk free without being challenged with the unvarnished truth. I doubt very much IF you get banned from Spotify you will even consider taking them to court for breach of contract and unfair denial of access to their service for your pirating of their content citing a supreme court decision based upon long superseded legislation about a completely different complaint and activity. You will just lose your legal access to the service and your only way to regain access will be to create a fraudulent new account and steal content until discovered again and if you have continued pirating streamed content banned again. and so on until you cease trying to pirate content or they get a restraining order issued against your unauthorised access to their servers. Is that likely to happen... probably not as you are probably not as stupid as you make out here (giving you the benefit of the doubt here)
GAOTD themselves KNOW the problem of users pirating giveaways and probably knew when they made their original setup.exe NON-THEMIDA protected wrapper and just retrieved the giveaways decryption key using unencrypted http connection and simply wrote out the decrypted installer to a temporary file and spawned it from that, that the protection was NOT foolproof but was a little bit of security, plus some security through obscurity... and that amount of DRM was sufficient until some bright spark decided to make a youtube video describing how to retrieve the decrypted temporary file containing the unwrapped installer and they had to up their game, and no longer make the unwrapped installer available as a single discrete file like before. They had to do this extra work because of the "secret" weaknesses in their DRM had been made public and that damaged their business model and deterred vendors from offering their products on this platform. The same happens on Spotify which is why these content pirating tools need periodic updates as Spotify and other services have to alter their program and protocols to defeat the bigger stream ripping products that are damaging their business models. Just like you never heard GAOTD site denouncing specific youtube videos and youtube members showing how to pirate their giveaways, you will never hear of Spotify or Youtube giving publicity to specific products or sites that promote products that are pirating the content on their services as that would simply lead those that want to keep streamed content and build their own libraries of stolen content to the pirating software... They will continue implementing as low a cost and least intrusive electronic countermeasures to pirating software ad inifnitum or if the problem becomes serious enough they could take the Chinese developer to court in USA citing DMCA legislation since the Chinese developer does business in USA when they sell to USA residents and if the developer does not turn up to court to defend themselves they will summarily be ruled against and another legal precedent will be made which no doubt you will turn a blind eye to LOL
When the file copy command was invented there was not such an issue about intellectual property abuse. and In fact if you do copy a program to a separate machine and the license clearly states lifetime license on one PC and you then install it on two at the same time then you have used that copy command to enable committing a breach of the license terms. Just like you might use a gun to legally hunt an animal in season but you could also use that gun to hunt the same animal type out of season... does that make the gun which, has legitimate and legal uses, illegal? no it does not but unauthorised programs designed solely to circumvent DRM and make a copy of streamed content on a gated service has no legal function in most jurisdictions. regardless of your fantasies about the US supreme court about completely different issues and legislation.
I won't bother replying to the other retorts of yours as they are as equally invalid and not based upon any legal or business reality in the world in which we live.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Peter Blaise, copyright owners are frequently forcing the take down of fan streams and uploads of entire episodes they DO NOT consider it free publicity!

Fair use doctrines are well known by those that have done the research and most content delivery services like youtube have taken legal advice on what constitutes fair use in what ever juisdiction they are operating in.

If copyright ownes were so care free about their distribution rights why are so many youtube video clips restricted to specific geographic regions?

To my knowledge you are not a commercial IP content "producer" so I don't see you as a good unbiased source of opinions of what commercial Copyright owners think and feel!

Vanity content produces may like free publicity but proffessional content producers do not want that so called free publicity that is really giving their content away for free!

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Peter Blaise, again completely untrue... contracts are made and signed every day where people sign away their legal rights! Ever heard of a non-disclosure agreement? That involves one party giving up their right to free speech or freedom of expression for the purposes laid down in the contract... It's up to the signatory that later regrets agreeing to a contracts restriction must then go to court and get the contract terms in question declared unfair or not legally enforcable before they can lawfully disclose that which was prohibited in the NDA contract. The exact same situation occours in terms of service for gated online services too.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

.
[ TK ] wrote "... pirating ..."

You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

There is nothing "pirating" about this or other GOTD software.

There is nothing "pirating" about in-home personal-use recording.

GOTD offerings are safe and legal to use as intended without fear of "pirating".
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)

.
Off topic, [ TK ] wrote "... When the file copy command was invented there was not such an issue about intellectual property abuse ..."

Au contraire, there were software license dongles, Lotus 1-2-3 and other software looking for their original licensed supposedly uncopyable diskette before loading, and hardware and software from many aftermarket vendors especially Central Point Software CopyIIPC that was able to copy supposedly copy-proof diskettes, and prior to PCs, IBM software was married to one specific machine serial number.

Such computer history and theories of it's meaning are fascinating, but off-topic and inappropriate in this thread, and unrelated to the fact that ...

-- GOTD software offerings and their use as intended is okay for all of us GOTD users, no risk, no civil or criminal lawsuits ever, ever, ever.

Enjoy.
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  Last month  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (-1)

Peter Blaise, I KNOW it does not mean just what you think it does! Piracy is the act of theft NOT the act of reselling! Reselling just makes you visible and worth prosicuting if you are not what is legally known as a man of straw... i.e. you have assets worth claiming against if only just the proceeds of the reselling of the pirated works.
Unauthorised reproduction of copyright work is an act of piracy of the IP as with software too.

https://www.techopedia.com/definition/5456/piracy

Study and find the truth and don't just assume what things mean to make it fit your behaviour, unless you never want to be taken seriously that is :-)

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  27 days ago  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Peter Blaise, wrong again the original copy command pre-dated any software that was written by end users or software houses and certainly pre-dated any add on licensing hardware! Or trick formats used to attempt to defeat software piracy. Cerainly pre-dated MS-DOS!

Think a little more logically... the problem had to exist before anyone had the thought to try and solve the problem... and long before people were pirating (making unathorised copies of) software they were copying their own wordstar .ws files and other files around because copy command was produced for end users to move their files about and to install software.

Reply   |   Comment by TK  –  27 days ago  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Gahi,

The premium Spotify offers a convenient download features, especially of higher qualities in the bitrate.

But the non-premium Spotify does not prohibit downloading ( you couldn't hear it if it did not download ), it just does not offer saving the download, nor does it prohibit recording for home use ( you just get a lower bitrate version ).

- - - - - - - - - -

Analogy - a premium car purchase may include prepaid ( "free" ) maintenance, but you can buy the non-premium and do your own maintenance, the non-premium car purchase does not and cannot prohibit your own maintenance ( nor can the premium car purchase prohibit your own maintenance, for that matter ).

.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  25 days ago  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

Peter Blaise, This is not true, from the Spotify Terms and Conditions:

Spotify respects intellectual property rights and expects you to do the same. We’ve established a few ground rules for you to follow when using the Service, to make sure Spotify stays enjoyable for everyone. You must follow these rules and should encourage other users to do the same. The following is not permitted for any reason whatsoever:

1. copying, redistributing, reproducing, “ripping,” recording, transferring, performing or displaying to the public, broadcasting, or making available to the public any part of the Spotify Service or the Content, or otherwise making any use of the Spotify Service or the Content which is not expressly permitted under the Agreements or applicable law or which otherwise infringes the intellectual property rights (such as copyright) in the Spotify Service or the Content or any part of it;
2. using the Spotify Service to import or copy any local files that you do not have the legal right to import or copy in this way;
3. transferring copies of cached Content from an authorized Device to any other Device via any means;
4. reverse-engineering, decompiling, disassembling, modifying, or creating derivative works of the Spotify Service, Content or any part thereof except to the extent permitted by applicable law. [If applicable law allows you to decompile any part of the Spotify Service or the Content where required in order to obtain the information necessary to create an independent program that can be operated with the Spotify Service or with another program, the information you obtain from such activities (a) may only be used for the foregoing objective, (b) may not be disclosed or communicated without Spotify’s prior written consent to any third party to whom it is not necessary to disclose or communicate in order to achieve that objective, and (c) may not be used to create any software or service that is substantially similar in its expression to any part of the Spotify Service or the Content];
5. circumventing any technology used by Spotify, its licensors, or any third party to protect the Content or the Service;

etc.

Reply   |   Comment by JohnL  –  24 days ago  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)

.
[ JohnL ] copied some stuff from Spotify's agreement.

Cool.

So, folks might enjoy reading and figuring out what they think the meaning is, including the info supplied by TuneKeep Spotify Music Converter.

Thanks for the challenge.
.

Reply   |   Comment by Peter Blaise  –  23 days ago  –  Did you find this comment useful? yes | no (0)
Add a comment

iPhone app giveaways »

Tiny Defense Giveaway
Use your wit and tactics to overcome the obstacles and save the gorgeous Green Planet!
$2.99 ➞ free today
OrasisHD Giveaway
OrasisHD takes a SINGLE image and automatically transforms it to a well-exposed, natural-looking photo.
$1.99 ➞ free today
Small Square Giveaway
A very simple and minimalist game where you are a small square that moves along a straight line.
$0.99 ➞ free today
MemoMa Giveaway
MemoMa turns your calendar into a journal. Your notes and calendar events are displayed in order.
$3.99 ➞ free today
Express Video - Add Emoji Giveaway
Add HD Emoji to your video to express yourself.
$3.99 ➞ free today

Android app giveaways »

Assassin Lord : Idle RPG (VIP) Giveaway
Defeat the monsters that come in unit by unit with the unique characters and various skills!
$1.99 ➞ free today
Smart Call Recorder PREMIUM Giveaway
Record calls on mobile devices.
$9.99 ➞ free today
My Little Star VIP : Idol Maker Giveaway
Decorate your own chibi character with cute items!
$0.99 ➞ free today
Smart navigation bar - navbar slideshow Giveaway
Makes android navigation bar an amazed navbars with navbar slideshows, cool animations & energy bar.
$0.99 ➞ free today
Aura - Icon Pack Giveaway
Aura icon pack is a package of IOS like icons with some nice modern gradients.
$0.00 ➞ free today