VST2 & Big Sur

[Audiority]

Supported and Allowed are two different words, especially where it comes to license agreements. It's pretty obvious that Steinberg won't support a (for them) discontinued format and that you aren't allowed to modify their headers to make it work if something goes wrong on new platforms.

My 2 cents,
Luca

[syntonica]

That just means supported, i.e. Steinberg will give assistance for those OSes. With any other OS, you're on your own. You could run VSTs on your toaster if you wanted.

I'm curious to see this purported C&D letter/email from Steinberg. It's possible that the original recipient doesn't have a proper VST 2 license agreement, is all.

Try as they may, Steinberg just isn't going to kill off VST 2 anytime soon. At least not until they really clean up the horror that is the VST 3 SDK.

[FigBug]

I'm curious to see this purported C&D letter/email from Steinberg. It's possible that the original recipient doesn't have a proper VST 2 license agreement, is all.

We definitely have a VST2 and VST3 license.

It was not a C&D letter, just an email advising us that we were in violation of the license agreement and asking us how we were going to proceed.

I'm assuming if nobody else has received one, and we have not received any additional information, they have given up on this course of action.

I do not think it is proper to post somebody else's email publicly on the internet.

[BlueprintInc]

I do not think it is proper to post somebody else's email publicly on the internet.

I agree. Still the reason would have been interesting. If they have not written one then the case is closed anyways

[syntonica]

We definitely have a VST2 and VST3 license.

It was not a C&D letter, just an email advising us that we were in violation of the license agreement and asking us how we were going to proceed.

I'm assuming if nobody else has received one, and we have not received any additional information, they have given up on this course of action.

I do not think it is proper to post somebody else's email publicly on the internet.

That's fine if you don't want to post it. I was assuming it was just a form letter. However, I would reply back, asking how the agreement is being violated specifically.

[george]

It says their SDK is supported for macOS 9.x and 10.x, nothing about allowed to be used on those systems only. I don't think it's against the contract terms if the licensed developer can make it work on 11.x or a banana.

[EvilDragon]

I want to see VST2s running on a potato.

[Urs]

It was not a C&D letter, just an email advising us that we were in violation of the license agreement and asking us how we were going to proceed.

Thanks for clearing this up.

[george]

I guess Steinberg realised they don't have any legal justification. Nothing received here from them by the way.

[Markus Krause]

V-machine (a hardware vst-host) runs VST2 plugin with Linux in an emulated environment. This product as well as all Linux VST plugins ever released would have been illegal from the scratch.

http://www.smproaudio.com/index.php/de/ ... /v-machine
http://linux-sound.org/linux-vst-plugins.html

I also see that there is a difference between 'supported' and 'allowed to use it with'. Just think about old computer games. They support 'Windows ME', 'Vista', etc. This does not mean that it is illegal to play your games with a newer Windows version, which still did not exist when the game was released.