> I think that situation is simpler, and is just as you surmise -- you > can't redistribute a plugin that claims to be under the GPL if it uses > the VST SDK headers. > > There _are_ some VST plugins out there that use the SDK but claim to > be under the GPL, and I think that is really borne of frustration with > the current impossibility of "doing it properly" because of the > restrictive license for the SDK headers (most painfully, the SDK > license's reverse-engineering clause effectively forbids publishing > source for a plugin that _doesn't_ use the SDK, if you have already > accepted the SDK license).
The PC itself famously became an open platform after Compaq clean-room reverse engineered the BIOS. This is considered legal - Someone who has NOT agreed to the VST SDK license can re-create headers that mirror the function of the VST SDK. They must do this by examining/debugging a running VST Host, not by looking at copy of the original SDK. You can't include the official VST SDK in a GLP plugin or host. Jeff McClintock. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
