Are you speculating or is this fact, on how the license will transfer as NFR?
I’m sure you can open Cubase 3SX-11 projects in Cubase 12. So that argument is not valid sorry.
Lets be honest, Cubase should not be accessible to many - Should be specialize to pro users.
But to open sx3 you will need the dongle. The reason to use sx3 is to convert old Cubase .all files. Sx3 is the last version of Cubase that can do this. So it’s not about Cubase 12 reading sx3 files
I don’t want to open SX3 - I can open all my projects in Cubase 12.
Lets leave it here - Obviously you see the need to keep your dongle and open SX3 if you need to. I say it is going to create more headaches than solutions.
I am all for a upgrade path, where I can run a trial version of Cubase 12, and if I accept, remove the old licenses. Make Cubase 11, like artist - Activate it locally. EZPZ.
It was discussed on a thread a while back, and there’s no speculating to know that Cubase license agreements only allow for single user. They’re not a seat/machine license arrangement or to be shared across other users.
And as standard procedure if you update from a previous product at a reduced fee, of course if you’re offered an NFR in return to support legacy products you don’t then give that away to another individual as you’re breaking terms.
Of course, there’s nothing physically stopping you from doing it, but neither is there to throw a brick through a window and take a TV, or any of the other methods of distributing a personal license to other third parties. It simply comes down to morality.
Yes you can, but you won’t have 32 bit plugins or other such supporting architectures that a true SX install would provide - for that you need a dongle to run any application, plugin or content library that is not on the new licensing system.
Absolute nonsense, there’s hobbyists, bands, songwriters, podcasters, youtubers, streamers, homebrew game creators and students who may have requirements ABOVE what Cubase Pro delivers. Maybe Nuendo is a requirement for some of them but they can’t justify the extra.
Vast majority of paying customers are not paid professionals, seen surveys online before and it’s around the 70-80% non paid professionals. Only Pro Tools has a higher ratio of pro vs hobby users and look at the state of the development and cost there - do you really wish that upon Cubase? I don’t.
I guess it is in the name - Cubase PRO. If you sell it as PRO, I guess you aim it for the pro market.
I wonder why we need any licensing or copy protection if it comes down to morality. Wouldn’t the world be a better place if this was true.
I actually don’t need it for sx3 as I converted my files years ago but I’ve answered questions on the forum in the last two weeks for people who do need to convert still. I’m sure there will be many more.
I also have Wavelab (which will eventually go to the new licensing ) and virtual guitarist 2 which will never be upgraded so will always require the dongle.
Software like Reaper that encompasses exactly that. Up to you, really. There’s 100’s of plugins and software that have no protection on them if you want to share software with friends.
Cubase employ many more staff and want to support them financially, so obviously have to protect their IP to protect jobs.
Licensing is just an agreement, if you can’t accept it you don’t use the software that someone has worked on for countless hours. Don’t know what’s so hard to understand really, you don’t actually own that software per se as the code is Steinberg’s, you own the right to use it as covered by the license acquired.
Pro indicates which level of software it is in terms of features, Cubase Elements isn’t for chemical substances, as Cubase AI isn’t for robots. It’s not like how Cockos differentiate between commercial and standard users, for example.
you are far too concerned with the hypothetical behavior of others. the type of person who would buy an NFR license (violating the terms) would most likely never purchase cubase legally in the first place. the notion that people who would illegally obtain cubase would otherwise be paying customers is ridiculous - the daw market is saturated and there are viable free options. the way i see it, steinberg would lose far more if they did not offer the NFR license after an upgrade, as many of us who prefer the dongle would no longer be buying updates.
I have reverted to older versions of applications dozens of times over the last thirty years to retrieve stems or entire projects for a client. In fact, I keep old installation media and even complete, frozen systems including Performer 3 on a Mac plus and Studio Vision Pro and Pro Tools on a Mac G4. They all still work. I would never agree to give up backward compatibility as a condition of going forward.
The USB eLicenser isn’t tied to a specific COMPUTER but it is definitely tied to a specific MySteinberg USER. You can look in your MySteinberg eLicenser settings and see that the USB eLicenser is registered to your account, and any Steinberg eLicenser-based products on the dongle are also registered against your account. In order to let someone else use your Cubase 11 license, they would have to use YOUR Steinberg credentials.
It is possible to remove the USB eLicenser from your account (there is a “Delete registration” link in the eLicensers section of the registrations page), and that eLicenser can then be added to another user’s MySteinberg account- but I do not know what happens to the software licenses still on the dongle (do they remain registered in your name, or do they go “unregistered” until the other user adds the dongle to their account?), and I haven’t found any documentation stating what exactly happens here. In any case, the system was intentionally designed so that “upgrade” licenses don’t result in users having extra transferable licenses to share with friends; this switch to the new licensing system has just resulted in this weird situation where they had to leave a legacy license stub on the dongle for people upgrading from eLicenser-based products to the new system.