Thanks for clearing that up. I had a hunch about that, but since it wasn’t mentioned anywhere and bearing the L for Linux in the name made me suspicious (inherited from LADSPA).
Somehow I still have bigger hopes for CLAP than for LV2 tbh.
1 Like
Bumping this thread due to the recent agreement changes from Steinberg that (TL;DR) put the nail on the coffin for VST2. Here’s a thread on KVR with some other references: Bye bye VST2 - Effects Forum - KVR Audio
In the future we would need exporters for native CLAP building
5 Likes
interesting… this clause is not in the VST3 agreement I signed a few years back.
Unfortunately you have to sign a new one within 6 months or they will cancel your existing agreement.
It seems there is no way around this.
As they are killing DAW support as well I guess it’s not a problem!
I don’t like Steinberg and their policy decisions, but…Are there actually any significant hosts left that haven’t yet implemented VST3 hosting?
2 Likes
The vst3 sdk is included in juce. I wonder if you all will make a new contract with Steinberg as soon as the Steinberg sdk is updated within juce? Is that on your radar?
1 Like
oh right, thx for the info - I was not aware of this? thx
Does that mean that if one were to stay on an older version of the vst3 sdk, one would still be able to release vst2 plugins?
This all seems so utterly pointless… vst2 is dying anyway, why do they need to put pressure on devs :(.
I don’t think retroactively changing the terms of a contract is legal. So this “six months from now it gets terminated” seems like typical Steinberg FUD.
1 Like
I agree.
But when all the others fall for the FUD and stop supporting VST/VST3, then it all doesn’t matter anyway.
So it makes an even stronger argument for CLAP.
Oh, we fully support the idea of adding CLAP to JUCE. Steinberg is a terribly unreliable partner. And I’m not only talking about their VST licensing behavior either…
1 Like
No worries, I understood you that way.
Just meant to point out, even with loopholes, the way steinberg damages their own eco system it becomes less interesting to spend effort in it.
My personal opinion is, after those events I would regard VST(x) as second class citizen, which I would cover with some glue code or a wrapper. But I would certainly not be stupid enough to base my technology stack on VST, when it can be axed by somebody else.
4 Likes
The cause terminating old VST 3 agreements has been in the agreement since 2018:
The new agreement also has this:
So I guess as long as you have not signed an agreement with cause 9.4 in it and you only use the version of the VST 3 sdk relating to that previous agreement then you don’t need to sign the new one.
I’m guessing most companies have signed an agreement with 9.4 in it.
Then I shall be waiting for a physical letter before removing VST support which will undoubtedly result in angry emails from customers still running legacy hosts and hoping for updates.
Wait what? Are you suggesting that even though having not received any notification they are nullifying all previous agreements and we need to reapply?
Long story short, yes. They are forcing us to re-sign an agreement, from my understanding of it
Btw… I don’t want to be “that guy”, but this is the most voted FR. I hope we’ll see something soon with the upcoming major JUCE release
2 Likes
However, WebView is more important /s
2 Likes
No, this is the most voted because it’ll help all plugin developers in the long run.
Webview is not a good solution for everyone.
No, I think they need to notify you and then you get 6 months to sign the new agreement, once you sign the new agreement all other agreements are canceled.
I could be wrong though, “6 months written notice” could be many things!
1 Like
Sorry, I’ve been on Reddit too much lately.
/s = sarcasm
These are my two cents on the subject: The 2023 JUCE User Survey - #56 by audiothing
3 Likes