New licensing and phone-homes

Since you are advocating for piracy, I don’t think Steinberg will opt for your suggestion.
But I am sure that before the Harkonen invasion or asteroid showers Steinberg will have come up with another licensing plan to cover additional possibilities–unless Space Aliens kidnap the programming team. :scream:

Well Space Aliens Did TRY to kidnap the programming team, but they escaped with the help of some earth types from Germany.


I am desperately trying, but failing, to think of a remunerative sales model that would work for Steinberg, without needing the policing of licences, such as Gilette use for their razors, whereby they sell the razor at cost, and make all the profits from selling blades.

:grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes: :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes: :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:


I’m not advocating for piracy. Too much piracy is clearly a problem, but also so is too much pain for paid users to stamp out the last 0.01% of piracy. There has to be a balance somewhere, and an idea of how much pain is too much pain. Time will tell. I feel sorry for people without internet access. was talking with one last night.

I am curiosity. What kind user is who has no Internet?

1 Like

The guy I was talking to last night had an iPad he used for anything that required a connection, but was too afraid of being able to properly secure a PC that was internet-connected. He’s retired, and had an IT support person all his working life, and so never learned that much about PCs, let alone PC security.

Another lady on the FB groups lives in a location with no internet access, and has to physically transport her computer to another location to install updates.

These are people too. There can be a myriad reasons why someone doesn’t have any access at all, but the main problems here I think will be people who have intermittent problems, and outages at Steinberg’s end since it’s impossible to completely avoid them longer term.

But they can make a 1 year license, which it says in the FAQ

Can I use Steinberg products on systems that are not connected to the internet at all?

We know that some customers prefer to run their studio machines offline, or that for specific projects it may be required for legal or contractual reasons not to connect to the internet for the duration of the project. To meet these requirements, we will shortly be introducing a process of activating a license for a period of one year, so that the computer can remain disconnected from the internet for that entire period and the software will continue to operate as normal.

They are distinguished by where they live. There are people in the USA, and Europe, including the UK, who have none or very unreliable or slow internet access. This is, of course, because the ISPs do not consider it financially worth their while to provide them decent access to what has become a necessity of life.

That is without considering Africa and other benighted areas.


1 Like

OT: I like the quote, but according to Quote Investigator, “there is no substantive evidence currently that Mark Twain wrote or spoke this statement.”

Nobody on here at least


What I object to, is the idea that people without internet seem to somehow deserve to have their license taken off them.

but me I do not think it function in that way. but a person who wants Dorico can go online one day and license keeps for one year.

How are people without internet going to load the program to begin with?
You seem to want to move the goal posts so you can continue to complain.
By all means, go for it.

Have you read this?

1 Like

I think @adrien presents some helpful perspective. I’m almost never without internet, but I can see the point that it shouldn’t be a requirement to use the software in perpetuity.

People have to download on another computer and use a USB thumbdrive.

I don’t know why you insist to argue that these people don’t exist. Or that they should be punished for their situation.

I guess you just think I’m complaining for the sake of it. Whether Steinberg does anything about this is up to them. I hope if they don’t change their minds on anything that not too many people are affected.

Then why not use the same option for the license?

sure, you can say people should just make whatever trip once a month or once a year to enable them to continue to use their paid license. The annual pilgrimmage to somewhere with internet access.

Or Steinberg could just say once you buy the license it can be used.

It’s Steinberg’s choice to force revalidation as a requirement of continued use of a license.

Why put all that cost onto those people. You don’t know everyone’s situation.

Imagine having to make a boat trip to somewhere with internet access to reactivate your license. When you get there the internet is down.

People should not assume that it will be trivial to reactivate for everyone. For 99.9% of people sure.

Maybe Steinberg really doesn’t care about those others. This is the disturbing behaviour I’m seeing here. Those people should be forced to make these trips to continue to use something they paid for? Honestly it’s a pretty unempathetic viewpoint.

Anyway, there won’t be a lot of people affected in this way. My prediction is that a lot more people will be affected by temporary outages at their end or Steinberg’s end when they haven’t started Dorico for 30 days. But what do I know. I only spent the last 26 years working in exactly this field. You guys who like to tinker with music software clearly know a lot more about network reliability than I do.

1 Like

I disagree. Where this conversation is going is shaming people (you’re advocating for piracy!) or forcing them to justify something they should never be even asked to justify to begin with.

The real moving of the goalposts will happen during the next upgrade, when Steinberg will replace a perpetual license with one that regularly expires and must be renewed - without ever fully admitting this. It’s clearly overshadowed by the technicalities of the dongle vs phone-home debate, but there is an ethical and reputational component to this replacement that’s not going away even if it is never properly addressed.

Instead, what I’ve seen here so far is derision (the usual suspects!), ridicule (what kind of person doesn’t have internet!), misdirection (but the dongles break too!) and denial (it’s perpetual if you renew the allowance!). The criticism is always, without exception, directed at the paying (sorry, entitled and ungrateful) user. Incredible.

1 Like

I’m going to close this thread now. @adrien’s views on the potential (and real) disadvantages of using a reactivation server have been well-aired and everybody has had plenty of opportunity to comment.

As I wrote in the main announcement thread, we have received plenty of feedback about our plans, and we are deep in discussions about what, if anything, we will do in response to that feedback. We will be sure to let you all know of any changes we decide to make.

Thanks to everybody for their considered feedback on this topic.