Subject: Re: [linux-audio-dev] LADSPA Version 1 Released
From: Paul Barton-Davis (pbd_AT_Op.Net)
Date: Sun Apr 02 2000 - 22:36:03 EEST
>> That's definitely not to say that people should use LADSPA rather than
>> VST - I'm still thinking about the whole issue.
>
>Hmm, just to make sure - how VST APIs are licenced? Am I totally free to
>write VST{1,2} hosts and plugin implementations?
The VST API is licensed free of charge with almost no restrictions on
use. The most onerous one is that you can't change the API or edit the
API files in any way. However, I can't see how, given the rest of the
license, you could not create an API that was not called VST, but was
100% compatible with VST and extended it as well. Mostly, you just
don't want to step on Steinberg's toes by "bringing disrepute to the
good name" etc. etc.
You also cannot distribute the API yourself. I am not sure how this
would apply if we did our own compatible-not-called-VST API.
--p
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sun Apr 02 2000 - 23:01:37 EEST