Vst3 License Agreement


The following use cases help you choose the correct license. 3.2. I want to distribute my plug-in/host as a freeware. You can distribute your plug-in/host in binary form. This always requires you to choose the Proprietary Steinberg VST3 license. Even if you distribute your plug-in/host in freeware, you must meet the requirements of the Proprietary Steinberg VST3 license. This means that we need another license file related to VST2. It would be nice if @ygrabit could get one as quickly as possible. You will find more details in www.steinberg.net/sdklicenses_vst3 This would mean that if you did not sign an agreement years ago specifically with respect to VST2, you are not covered by the current VST3 agreement? But that`s a big question. Why not have the VST2 files gPL? I do an open source GPL3 synthesizer (tytel.org/helm) and unable to redistribute VST2 files makes the construction process really difficult. There are also a whole series of other logistical problems that arise because these (3?) The files are still proprietary licensed. 3.1. I want to share the source code of my plug-in/host on GitHub.

You can choose the GPLv3 license and share the source code for your plug-ins/hosts, including the VST3 SDK sources on GitHub. The Proprietary Steinberg VST 3 license allows you to distribute your VST 3 plug-in/host in binary form. However, please note the following requirements: I`ll just catch up with it. I don`t have a licensing agreement with Steinberg, but from what I collect, I can download the SDK, fill out the license form, email it to Steinberg, and then I can publish vST2 plugins after October? FYI: I dealt with all of Steinberg`s licensing issues this week. 3.3. I want to sell my plug-in/host in binary form. If you work for profit and distribute your plug-in/host in binary form, you must choose the Proprietary Steinberg VST3 license. Are you saying that a user of the proprietary license may not share the source code for their project? I think anyone, the VST-Plug-Ins or hosts, for profit or not, can share their source code if they wish. This agreement does not apply to the development or hosting of VST 2 plug-ins. steinbergmedia.github.io/vst3_doc/vstsdk/vst3License.html#lic4 ↩ Ah, I was deceived by the numbering in file name vst3610 > vstsdk369, so the old one (the newest you download on the site) should be in order, because VST2 evolves, I think. @ygrabit, it would be cool if we clarified 3.4.

I want to sell my plug-in/host in binary form. You can customize and modify the source of the VST3 SDK to suit your needs, but if you want to distribute these sources on GPLv3, you also need to distribute the sources of your plug-in/host on GPLv3. It is permissible to modify vsT3 SDKs if you distribute your plug-in/host in binary form and choose the Proprietary Steinberg VST3 license. If you think we need to include your changes in the SDK, please contact us (use the sdk.steinberg.net). The distribution of a plug-in/host in binary form requires the proprietary license? Are you saying that a GPLv3 license user may not also distribute binary files compiled from the source they publish? As I understand it, the GPLv3 itself allows anyone who receives the software in one way or another to distribute and modify it without changing the license.