Steinberg Discontinuing VST2 Support in its products

[crickey13]

VST2 can’t be wrapped with anything that requires it to be open sourced. Such as the GPLv3 version of the VST3 license. But the commercial (aka proprietary) VST3 license might eventually exclude the right to publish derivatives of VST2…

Will it be possible to release fully VST2-compatible CLAP versions of plugins without St*inberg being able to interfere in the process any way whatsoever?

It would be nice if you could just swap old VST2 versions for new CLAP updates while retaining a degree of backwards compatibility for proper project recall.

Other than that, let's face it, VST2 is kinda dead going forward and in Cubase, it's literally dead.

CLAP's VST2-compatibility would really make it easier to popularize the format, make it appeal to a larger audience and make it spread a lot faster. Inane as it sounds, CLAP could be then unofficially marketed as "new VST2, but better".

Given St*inberg's previous statements, I doubt they will make other DAWs drop VST2 support altogether despite them being fully able to do so. They appear to be interested more in sticking it to plugin developers rather than DAW devs, I don't think they're that stupid... but who knows, maybe they really wanna go full apeshit and wreak havoc across the board.

[Dewdman42]

I don't think its that devious. Steinberg just has their own proprietary purposes and goals for basing Cubase around VST3 architecture and they wish the rest of the industry would produce proper VST3 plugins to get into that architecture. And they don't want to continue having to support VST2 in their Cubase anymore. They are hoping that with some leverage they can get the rest of the industry to oblige to that

[zvenx]

I don't think its that devious. Steinberg just has their own proprietary purposes and goals for basing Cubase around VST3 architecture and they wish the rest of the industry would produce proper VST3 plugins to git into that architecture. And they won't want to continue having to support VST2 in their Cubase anymore. They are hoping that with some leverage they can get the rest of the industry to oblige to that

I somewhat 85% agree with you
rsp

[FigBug]

Given St*inberg's previous statements, I doubt they will make other DAWs drop VST2 support altogether despite them being fully able to do so. They appear to be interested more in sticking it to plugin developers rather than DAW devs, I don't think they're that stupid... but who knows, maybe they really wanna go full apeshit and wreak havoc across the board.

Oh, they are trying. Here is part of an email I was sent.

We have found that you provide a beta for Apple Silicon with support of VST2.

We are in touch with Apple and have some discussion about removing any support of VST under Silicon Native ARM processor. The VST 2 license agreement does not allow support for MacOS 11.

What is your strategy about situation?

It is complete nonsense. What does "We are in touch with Apple and have some discussion about removing any support of VST" even mean? How can Apple remove VST support? It is completely between the host and the plugin.

"The VST 2 license agreement does not allow support for MacOS 11." What? Nowhere in the VST2 license agreement does it say what OS are allowed. You don't need to sign a new agreement every time a new OS comes out.

This is what it has come to with Steinberg. Baseless legal threats about supporting VST2 designed to waste time and money.

[Dewdman42]

well anyway, this is why the rest of us need to stop sucking off the nursemaid and make one neutral agnostic plugin format to rule them all without any company bias. Apple already did that a long time ago with AU, but its MacOS only. Microsoft tried and basically failed to do that with DX on the windows side. But a solution which hits Mac,Windows,Linux...all with the same plugin architecture...and ruled by no self-interested company...is what is needed.....and has always been needed, we as a whole....all of us...just went along with the VST ride because until recently it was pretty smooth sailing...

Steinberg has their own self interest and they never really pretended to be anything else, the rest of us just took it at face value that they would be some kind of good citizen with their "industry standard VST" architecture.....that's on us for assuming that and/or relying on that. And it will be doubly on us if we continue down that road at this point now that is painfully obvious...

[DarkStar]

Meanwhile (and this may be a silly question):

If Steinberg does withdraw VST2 development licences (is that the right term?) what will all those big boys (Native Instruments, Arturia, IK Multimedia, UVI, Universal Audio, iZotope, Waves etc etc) do? They have invested a lot of money, time and effort in developing VST2 plug-ins.
Or have I misunderstood?

[rasmusklump]

Uvi have their vst3 versions ready when needed.

[zvenx]

Meanwhile (and this may be a silly question):

If Steinberg does withdraw VST2 development licences (is that the right term?) what will all those big boys (Native Instruments, Arturia, IK Multimedia, UVI, Universal Audio, iZotope, Waves etc etc) do? They have invested a lot of money, time and effort in developing VST2 plug-ins.
Or have I misunderstood?

I imagine, if this was to ever happen, there would be court cases.

rsp

[Dewdman42]

There is nothing, at present, that Steinberg can do to force existing VST2 license folders to stop distributing products using VST2. They didn't think that far ahead when they did the VST2 licensing and they don't have a way to automatically revoke it. As I understand. Urs is much more knowledgeable on this point and maybe he can comment.

However, the latest VST3 license does have stuff in it where Steinberg can revoke it at any time. And by the way, that means that at some future point its entirely possible that Steinberg would try to say something like "if you want to use VST3, you have to sign the newest VST3 license and that newest VST3 license includes an agreement to cease and desist using VST2". I would not put that past Steinberg at all.... I don't know if there would be lawsuits or not..I think probably people will just comply...

[Erisian]

There is nothing, at present, that Steinberg can do to force existing VST2 license folders to stop distributing products using VST2. They didn't think that far ahead when they did the VST2 licensing and they don't have a way to automatically revoke it. As I understand. Urs is much more knowledgeable on this point and maybe he can comment.

However, the latest VST3 license does have stuff in it where Steinberg can revoke it at any time. And by the way, that means that at some future point its entirely possible that Steinberg would try to say something like "if you want to use VST3, you have to sign the newest VST3 license and that newest VST3 license includes an agreement to cease and desist using VST2". I would not put that past Steinberg at all.... I don't know if there would be lawsuits or not..I think probably people will just comply...

Sssh. Don't give them ideas!

[Super Piano Hater 64]

Sssh. Don't give them ideas!

They literally already tried this.

[zvenx]

Interesting read:


This has already caught my eye:

6. This Agreement neither applies to the development nor the hosting of VST2 Plug-Ins.

and this:

  9 TERM AND TERMINATION
1. The Agreement shall run for an unlimited period.
2. Steinberg is entitled to terminate this Agreement with a 24 months written notice. For the validity of
the termination it shall be sufficient that Steinberg sends the termination to the last known email
address of the Licensee.
3. Steinberg is entitled to terminate this Agreement with a 6 months written notice if Steinberg publishes
a new version of VST Software Developer Kit subject to a separate licensing Agreement.
4. If the Licensee is in breach of any material obligations set out in this Agreement and does not cure
such breach by Steinberg’s demand within 14 days, Steinberg shall be entitled to terminate this
Agreement immediately. In such a case, this license and all the rights granted to the Licensee herein
shall immediately cease.
5. The right to extraordinary termination for good cause shall remain unaffected.
6. For the validity of the termination, it shall be sufficient that Steinberg sends the termination to the last
known email address of the Licensee.
7. Any and all prior VST 3 Plug-In SDK Agreements between Steinberg and the Licensee shall be
automatically terminated by signing this Agreement.

(emphasis mine), as is I am guessing those are the two clauses of concern?
rsp

[Dewdman42]

Sssh. Don't give them ideas!

They literally already tried this.

Did they? What happened? I must have missed that. I don't have a VST2 license, I missed the memo to get grandfathered in, so I haven't really been keeping track...

[Dewdman42]

Interesting read:


This has already caught my eye:

6. This Agreement neither applies to the development nor the hosting of VST2 Plug-Ins.

rsp

in my view that does not preclude anyone from continuing their VST2 development and distribution if they already have an existing VST2 license. Its simply saying that the newer license does not include VST2 in it. Unless the new VST3 license has language that it somehow terminates all pre-existing VST2 license agreements or something of that nature.

[zvenx]

Interesting read:


This has already caught my eye:

6. This Agreement neither applies to the development nor the hosting of VST2 Plug-Ins.

rsp

in my view that does not preclude anyone from continuing their VST2 development and distribution if they already have an existing VST2 license. Its simply saying that the newer license does not include VST2 in it. Unless the new VST3 license has language that it somehow terminates all pre-existing VST2 license agreements or something of that nature.

I read it that way to and no I don't see anything there terminating existing vst2 license agreements.

rsp