Free range threads taste better than those raised in captivity.
Sorry 'bout that. 
âfree rangeâ 
I think what there is, is at least âcloseâ to being fair enough. I DO think Steinberg customers should be given a MUCH better break on buying a 2nd license, than DOUBLE the price though! At the very LEAST, what a student copy costs! 
To go even further, I think Steinberg should allow a licensed user, the ability to run ONE single âpayed forâ license on at least TWO machines, or better THREE machines WHEN hooked up and ran TOGETHER in the same studio/environment (and not necessarily having to turn on/run them simultaneously full-time either) with use for say, VST System Link without paying more Iâm CERTAIN and dare I say, I have FAITH in the smart people who work for Steinberg that they could develop a dongle/license that could very well be ran in this way OR⌠at least have a very reasonable extra fee, but would be more cost effective for Steinberg development to just make them ALL that way 
Other than this, I donât generally see a LOT of need to have to use the FULL version of Cubase for prolly most people who want to use the software for some on location recording. Iâm betting most could just use a Cubase lite free OEM version on a laptop, or even bring a Zoom H4 along with them I canât see paying full price for a 2nd license unless youâre doing some SERIOUS professional on location recordingâŚa PAYING recording gig!
As for protecting the dongle, hell when I used to gig I brought THOUSANDS of dollars worth of equipment, worth MUCH more than a cheap plastic and over priced dongle license! If I didn;t want anything stolen, or broken I had to WATCH out for my stuff. Why should a dongle be any different? Being cheap plastic, Iâd encase it in some kind of highly protective & nearly indestructible shell, and run a short USB extension on it to my DAW.
Itâs Free-Range, but like in the stores, the chickens are not really allowed outside the henhouse. 
Sorry Steve.
I have to disagree.
The fence was not created to keep the chickens in the henhouse, but te keep the foxes out of it.
Since chickens have adopted to the situation, they are not very skilled in flying anymore, but a good wild chick can still fly a little. 
Many years ago we had chickens at my parents home, and they were still allowed to walk completely free.
They slept in the bushes actually. (lower vegatation, not those high trees) They easily could fly around 100 meters.
And sometimes indeed one of them went missing in action. Most of the times it was also the last time we saw her or him. But they were really happy chicks, that was a certain thing.
So the same thing with the licenses. Steinberg should trust us, and allow us to copy that license for ourselfs. We are not going to distribute it.
So i agree with the OP. It is bad bussiness to put the responsability of preserving the unique license to its customers.
Let us live happy and free and let us copy without restrictions.
Let us gather together and come up for our rights.
And let us not become as the chickens at my parents home in time⌠extinct.
kind regards,
R.
1 Like
And itâs been far too long since Iâve seen a good, wild chick.
1 Like
yeah. Sad isnât it.
That is what becomes of you when you trust humans.
You become fat and tasty, and learn to live in a small cage.
Probably, in the next step of their evolution, they will not have wings anymore.
and for those who do not believe the story on the first page:
Flying is easy. Just throw yourself at the ground, and miss.
It will inevitably result in the failure of the company. Sorry, that is just the way of the world today. It is easy to say, âplease trust usâ, when it is not ones own companyâs future on the line.
Sure, you may not distribute the license but what is to stop someone from buying the first license legitimately (so now they are one of âus loyal goodhearted customersâ) and then making copies for sale illegally?
In the digital age, copy protection is just a fact, plain and simple. Especially when the product is one of the top in the market. Sure, some DAWs may have simpler or no copy protection but that is simply because the demand for that product is not as great.
My own opinionâŚ
Thatâs because those âwild chicksâ are now âold chooksâ who donât stray too far from the roost⌠.
They wouldnât even try to sell the license illegally. Theyâd simply post it on a torrent site, and then untold thousand of people on the Internet would be saying, âWhy should I pay for this when I can get it for free?â
And it only takes one person. Just one. And then itâs out there and you canât get it back. Would this really happen? Just ask the record labels.
Iâd love to live in a world where I could just trust people. And when Humanity 2.0 rolls around, maybe Iâll give that a try.
Or they work at the Clermont Lounge in Atlanta. 
Hereâs a true story.
I meet a guy at a gathering who works for a friend of mine. My friend had told this guy about my books. When we meet, the guy says, âYeah, I just downloaded a copy of Career Programmer from a torrent site, Iâm really enjoying it. I guess I owe you some money, huh?â Then he laughs like it doesnât mean a thing.
Itâs not like I make that much money per book, but to walk up to someone who creates intellectual property - you know, like a song - and say to their face, âHey, I just stole a copy of your work, really enjoying itâ just astounds me. Not so much because of the scope of the crime (itâs not like Iâm a NY Times bestselling author) but the fact that he didnât think there was anything wrong with what he did, or he wouldnât have looked me straight in the eye and told me about it.
People simply feel entitled to take what they want without paying, and will jump through all sorts of logical hoops to justify their actions. Mainly so they donât have to confront any internal moral dilemmas.
Sadly, this guy is why software has copy protection.
i understand the arguments.
And as such i can live with a dongle, more even since the policy has changed in to a one time replacement if lost.
But the dongle + unique license is still not practicle.
i can say that i am considering what you said in the first post. Get AI. That is in fact a very nice idea. 48 audio tracks is more then enough for a complete gig. (backtracks) 16 supporting instruments tracks is a bit of a bummer though. But maybe with VEP instances i can occupy the 48 midi-tracks, and that sould be sufficient. But iâm still in the âhow toâ fase, because this means a complete rework of the templates. And with VEP iâm also on the dongle again.
kind regards,
R.
Maybe a good idea should be a âplayerâ version of cubase. One that does not allow to record or edit anything, but that can play back everything that has been made in cubase without any need to modify things, and without the need of a dongle.
kind regards,
R
Of course, one workaround to a limitation of plugins (if I follow what youâre saying correctly) is to get a bunch where you want them, render each track, and then you can reuse the plugins for another batch of instruments.
In fact, I render all tracks and use the audio files for the live performance projects to minimize the load.
I donât know if you can get any of the Elements / AI / etc. versions of Cubase without purchasing them and / or the hardware, but essentially thatâs what I use them for. The fact that you can also record, etc. is just a bonus.
Iâm a big fan of the art of the possible. While itâs always good to suggest enhancement requests to developers, itâs best to assume theyâll never be implemented and figure out how to make it all happen with what you have to work with.
Cuplayyah
People like that make me sick. 