Datz $162 all you can eat downloads
p2pnet news view | Music:- Would you pay £99.99 ($162US) as a one-off fee for unlimited downloads?
EMI, Warner Music and indie label Beggars Group reckon you would.
Their Datz Music Lounge is a, “revolutionary new way to buy and enjoy music,” they say, explaining:
“As a music lover you now have a vast selection of music at your fingertips …”
Er, guys, that’s been the case for ten years, or so.
But, they say, our deal is for a, “single one off cost”.
Ah SO!
“All the music is yours to keep forever and downloads can take place at any time during a whole year after the product is registered – and best of all the music is downloaded in MP3 format and DRM free to your PC which means you can sync them with any digital music player, mobile phone and even your iPod,” it says.
“Not only will Datz Music Lounge fundamentally change the way you enjoy music, it also provides one of the greatest offers of all time.”
Now you know.
Meanwhile, it might be a good idea for them to take another shot at their home page.
News 1130 – , October , 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It`s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
October 31st, 2008 at 7:41 pm
it’s meant be grungy and attract a certain crowd. All in all, it’s not a bad deal for those paranoid of being sued and have the money to pay such a fee. Though, the selection probably sucks.
October 31st, 2008 at 9:06 pm
Not a bad deal however selection is limited to a few tracks per band. I have easily spent that amount at other non RIAA sites. The Russian sites are still the best way to go as they have great selection and are cheap. Sometime difficult to apply funds as the credit cards are all American and they are as corrupt as the American government.
For those afraid of the Russian sites I can only say they have never screwed me around and have the best customer service I have seen on the internet.
I primarily deal with 4 different sites and never had a problem that wasn’t fixed within a day. Not to mention 2 of those sites gave me free funds when I couldn’t top up with my credit card.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:09 pm
does anyone know if they got the big 4 stamp of approval? otherwise, they will be sued out of existence.
i have over 112 million songs for download, and i charge nothing, ironic.
there are other p2p’s than KaZaA.
oh, and Coconut works for wal-mart.
stw
October 31st, 2008 at 10:11 pm
$162 a year or a one time fee? Most of the music I listen too (Psytrance) isn’t on iTunes or any other mainstream music site and I doubt that its on Datz Music Lounge.
http://www.datz.com/musicloungepromo/tech-info.php
November 1st, 2008 at 11:51 pm
funny
for 60$ a month canadian SAC the song writers and CMCC ( a coalitio nof top canuck artists ) said thats the yearly for all there music.
At least thats the 1st proposal, and think of it as a levy ion all net accounts is what htey wanted that amounted to
18 times the current 70million a year levy. as in 1.1 billion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! for 5$
now canada has 33 million people , multiply the above by your country ( rough i know) and see how greedy THESE BASTARDS are.
November 2nd, 2008 at 12:48 am
This is so lame, I guess they’re trying to adopt a new business model base on the fact that they can’t sue these p2p networks out of existance, but it’s a bit too late because why pay money for that when I can get my music via limewire and BitTorrent for free no one time yearly fee involved.
November 2nd, 2008 at 6:56 pm
$162 for a bunch of songs that I don’t know which ones are there now, if any of them will be made available in the future, if it will consist mostly of singles, albums or just greatest hits, if any new albums will be appearing in a timely manner concurrent with release dates, if certain genres or obscure groups will be even considered, or even if they take requests for certain groups or songs or albums.
Pass.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:40 am
Can anybody figure out what the quality of the files are? Still not extremely interested in paying for lossy music. Though something more like $10/month for all-you-can-eat, yours forever, no drm v0-quality mp3′s would be the most reasonable deal we’ve seen yet. Personally the prices they are charging now ($.99/track) is more what I’d expect lossless files to cost.
November 3rd, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Bit rate for new releases is 320k
For back catalogue re-releases itâs 320k
For general back catalogue tracks itâs 256k
Also note that tracks are free of ad-ware and virusâs
Nov 3, 7:46 AM – [ Edit | Delete | Unapprove | Approve | Spam ] – Datz
$162 all you can eat downloads | datzmusiclounge.com | IP: 127.0.0.1
Bit rate for new releases is 320k
For back catalogue re-releases itâs 320k
For general back catalogue tracks itâs 256k
Also note that tracks are free of ad-ware and virusâs
November 12th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Of course this is a totally biased place to discuss this! There are people out there who prefer to stay legal – especially at such a small fee. I know people who smoke and drink this amount every week! To say this is something only rich people are going to be doing is just a deluded attempt to justify yourselves! Illegal downloaders are numerous but are greatly out-numbered by the total internet using population. Provide a service which is legal, free from concern from virus (etc), offers a reasonable selection and does not cost a fortune and the masses will buy it. I do not think datz is going to achieve this but I think someone will (eventually). If it happens…. illegal downloading will be seen a similar light to picking up ciggy butts because you are to cheap to pay for your own!
December 5th, 2008 at 8:34 am
“Illegal downloaders are numerous but are greatly out-numbered by the total internet using population.”
I would actually disagree with that statement. The people the RIAA are sueing dont even realize that their kazaa folder is actually shared. So take into consideration the accidentaly file-sharers, the incidental file-sharers, and the hardcore file-sharers, and they pretty much outnumber non-file-sharers. Although the numbers cannot be accurately defined, there are ever increasing file-sharers thanks to the MAFIAA pushing people away from legitimate overpriced outlets of corporate ‘product’ towards DRM free, commercial free, do-what-you-want-with-it ‘content’. I personally have an impressive library of digital content and never paid these slime-balls one red cent. And I dont have to worry about my ‘content’ working if/when the DRM server holds no more interest in the selling ‘party’. My content has no DRM.