On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Victor Lazzarini
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).
So I expect the view is that, so long as nobody with a stake in the
software objects to it, then at least the license has described what
the plugin's author would like to happen in an ideal world. It's a
grey-market situation. You wouldn't be able to include such a plugin
in a typical Linux distribution.
Linux-audio-dev mailing list