On 07/02/13 20:31, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Simon Wise wrote:
very interesting ... so the SDK license clause was trying to achieve
something else?
It's a pretty standard SDK condition
E.g. http://www.adobe.com/devnet/photoshop/sdk/eula.html
"You may not reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble any portion of the SDK."
so is the lack of FLOSS VST host distribution because nobody bothered to ask
Steinberg for a license? or is it because Steinberg said no when asked?
Several hosts work well it seems, and have done so for some time, but their
developers seem to believe they cannot be distributed as FLOSS binaries.
Simon
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
