Bye bye VST2

[pdxindy]

Why would Steinberg do that ? What harm does it do supporting VST2 ?

They don't even have to support VST2... just not force developers to give it up.

[jens]

it's incredible the way in which you wade into these discussions from a position of pure, raw ignorance.

This.

[gaggle of hermits]

To be honest, I don't even know if that's entirely legal but as a one-man-band I can't take the risk against a huge company like that one.

It probably contravenes EU antitrust regulations: abuse of market position.

I think this might be why the text in the agreement is so opaque about what it means for vst2. you're meant to assume that Steinberg will terminate a vst3 agreement with any developers continuing to support vst2. but the lawyers have constructed it so that you can't just send the text to Brussels as part of a complaint because the position isn't spelled out: they let the support team take the hit on that. they'd only trigger the complaint if they acted against a vendor with real live action.

and are they daft enough to terminate Ableton's contract if future versions of live include vst2 support and risk triggering the antitrust complaint?

however, very few operations are in a financial position to take the chance so Steinberg is happy for devs to assume they are at risk...or at least they would be happy if they haven't belatedly realised they are on the way to losing any control over the plugin business in any case.

[Audiority]

well the fact is, as per my understanding of the new agreement, is that we (devs) will have to sign again the contract with these new terms in order to keep developing plugins in VST3 format

[jamcat]

Developers don’t have to sign on to the latest VST3. They can remain stuck in the past forever with outdated VST2 and VST3 SDKs. It sounds like that’s what the ones who are complaining want, anyways.

[gaggle of hermits]

well the fact is, as per my understanding of the new agreement, is that we (devs) will have to sign again the contract with these new terms in order to keep developing plugins in VST3 format

I don't envy the position you're in. Steinberg is approaching this in the stupidest way possible.

[Audiority]

Developers don’t have to sign on to the latest VST3. They can remain stuck in the past forever with outdated VST2 and VST3 SDKs. It sounds like that’s what the ones who are complaining want, anyways.

Section 9 is clear. For them the written notice is done by "sending to the last known email address". Meaning: they can say they sent it. It's not necessary we have to receive it.

[jamcat]

Developers don’t have to sign on to the latest VST3. They can remain stuck in the past forever with outdated VST2 and VST3 SDKs. It sounds like that’s what the ones who are complaining want, anyways.

Section 9 is clear. For them the written notice is done by "sending to the last known email address". Meaning: they can say they sent it. It's not necessary we have to receive it.

So the previous contract you signed also includes this? :

“Steinberg is entitled to terminate this Agreement with 6 months written notice if Steinberg publishes a new version of VST Software Developer Kit subject to a separate licensing Agreement.”

Have they actually sent out such written notice, though?

Just because they reserve the right, it doesn’t mean they necessarily exercise it.

[chk071]

told everyone that VST3 is the thing now

Exactly, you just made everyone's point.

I always wonder who that "everyone" is some people on forums tend to talk so frequently about. Must be some kind of confirmation issue.

And, no, your point was entirely different. It was that someone forces you to give up something to keep you in business.

[rj0]

I'm certain VST4 will be much better.

[MogwaiBoy]

Great, remind me to buy a 4TB C:Drive for my next computer.

The stupidest thing about VST3 is that they can only go on your OS drive.

And in general, VST3 versions are heavier in filesize and sometimes CPU, and more prone to bugs.

[Michael L]

§1.6 can be understood to exclude VST2 from the scope of the agreement as well.

The Agreement is very clear:

§1.6 This Agreement neither applies to the development nor the hosting of VST 2 Plug-Ins.

[zvenx]

§1.6 can be understood to exclude VST2 from the scope of the agreement as well.

The Agreement is very clear:

§1.6 This Agreement neither applies to the development nor the hosting of VST 2 Plug-Ins.

Damn good point.
rsp

[josb]

Only applies to the sale of VST2 Plug-Ins then?

[Jac459]

I'm certain VST4 will be much better.

Oh yes, it is... It is called CLAP.