1
Steinberg Cubase / Re: Wavelab 1.6 (1997) requires Windows 95 or NT4.0
« Last post by smilesdavis on June 06, 2026, 09:59:06 PM »i got 1.0 1.5 1.6 2.0 3.0 what info do you need
Recent | Online | Vintage | Modern | XP | Win | Mac OS9 | DOS | Amiga | Atari ST | Graphics | Midi io | Sequencers | Roland "MC" | E-mu | Ensoniq | Akai MPCs | Samplers | Akai "S" | Roland "S" | Synths | VST Samplers | VST Synths | Roland "JV" | Modules | Drums | Mixers | Timeline | Hackintosh | Artists | Graphics
Welcome to Oldschooldaw.com! (Online since 2014) serving vintage computers worldwide! this is our NEW WEBHOST as we've moved from our OLD GODADDY to a brand new server location to start off 2026. thanks to Godaddy for hosting the site for 11 years and a big thank you to IONOS.COM for the great pricing going forward!
Recent Posts
2
Reason Studios / Re: how to sue LANDR + Reason Studios in small claims court for breach of contract
« Last post by chrisNova777 on June 06, 2026, 04:24:16 PM »im happy to report that one of the managers of reason + LANDR was able to help me walk away from the loss of $$ i encountered trying to buy old reaosn licenses is not easy, especially on ebay in 2026.
anyway i was gifted a largely discounted anual reason plus subscription , which dollar for dollar lets me recover about 60-70% of my losses so i will stop speaking on this topic as of now
anyway i was gifted a largely discounted anual reason plus subscription , which dollar for dollar lets me recover about 60-70% of my losses so i will stop speaking on this topic as of now
3
Digidesign Pro Tools / Re: Protools LE 5.3.2 digi 002 authorization
« Last post by yungjoon on May 12, 2026, 03:31:40 PM »Ok, I hope you will find it. Take your time, I am not hurry.
4
Digidesign Pro Tools / Re: Protools LE 5.3.2 digi 002 authorization
« Last post by chrisNova777 on May 10, 2026, 09:20:34 PM »i am in the process of rebuilding my fileserver
i had a Power supply unit fail
i have to replace the psu in the fileserver then i will have access to my files again
probably about 1 week frm now sorry
i had a Power supply unit fail
i have to replace the psu in the fileserver then i will have access to my files again
probably about 1 week frm now sorry
5
Digidesign Pro Tools / Re: Protools LE 5.3.2 digi 002 authorization
« Last post by yungjoon on May 08, 2026, 06:11:41 AM »I downloaded the 5.3.2 version of protools from macos9lives. But no serial is provided with it.
I hope you will refind it. Thanks!
I hope you will refind it. Thanks!
6
Reason Studios / Re: can a software company be taken to small claims court for not honouring licenses
« Last post by chrisNova777 on May 07, 2026, 11:35:15 AM »In Ontario Small Claims Court, Form 7A is where you lay out your case. Since you are dealing with a software license dispute, you need to be technically precise about the "breach" (the failure to honor the contract).
Below is a draft for the "Reasons for Claim and Details" section. You can copy, paste, and adjust the bracketed information to match your specific situation.
Form 7A: Reasons for Claim
1. The Parties
The Plaintiff, [Your Full Name], is an individual residing in Barrie, Ontario. The Defendant, LANDR Audio Inc. (NEQ: 1168758879), is a federally incorporated Canadian company with a head office in Montreal, Quebec, providing digital audio software and services.
2. The Contract
On or about [Date of Purchase], the Plaintiff purchased a retail license for [Name of Software, e.g., LANDR Mastering Plugin] from the Defendant for the sum of $[Amount Paid]. The terms of the sale, as presented at the time of purchase, specified that this was a perpetual license, granting the Plaintiff indefinite use of the software version purchased without the requirement of a recurring subscription.
3. The Breach of Contract
On or about [Date Access Was Cut], the Defendant unilaterally disabled the Plaintiff’s access to the software and/or refused to provide the necessary authorization/license server access required for the software to function. The Defendant has informed the Plaintiff that they will no longer honor the retail-sold perpetual license and instead require the Plaintiff to [e.g., pay for a monthly subscription / buy a new version] to regain access to the tools they already purchased.
4. Failure to Rectify
The Plaintiff has contacted the Defendant’s support team on multiple occasions (see attached Exhibit A: Correspondence) to request restoration of the licensed services. The Defendant has refused to honor the original terms of the agreement. A formal demand letter was sent on [Date of Demand Letter] and was [ignored / rejected].
5. Damages
As a result of the Defendant’s breach of contract, the Plaintiff has suffered the following damages:
Direct Loss: The original purchase price of $180 + Court costs
Replacement Cost: The cost of acquiring equivalent software to replace the functionality lost due to the Defendant's breach, totaling $[Amount].
Total Claim: The Plaintiff claims the sum of $[Total Amount] plus pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and the costs of this proceeding.
Tips for your Attachments (Exhibits)
When you file this online or at the 75 Mulcaster St. courthouse, you must attach copies of your evidence. Label them clearly:
Exhibit A: Your original purchase receipt or "Thank you for your order" email.
Exhibit B: Any marketing material or EULA screenshots you have that use the word "Perpetual" or "Buy" (as opposed to "Subscribe").
Exhibit C: The email thread where they told you they aren't honoring the license.
Exhibit D: A copy of the Demand Letter you sent them and the registered mail tracking receipt.
A Note on the "Consumer Protection Act"
If LANDR tries to argue that you have to sue them in Quebec because of their Terms of Service, you should mention in your hearing that under Section 7(1) of the Ontario Consumer Protection Act, any term in a consumer contract that tries to prevent you from taking a legal over a dispute in an Ontario court is not binding on you.
Would you like me to draft a quick "Demand Letter" for you to send via registered mail before you officially file the court papers? (The court usually likes to see that you gave them one last chance to fix it.)
Below is a draft for the "Reasons for Claim and Details" section. You can copy, paste, and adjust the bracketed information to match your specific situation.
Form 7A: Reasons for Claim
1. The Parties
The Plaintiff, [Your Full Name], is an individual residing in Barrie, Ontario. The Defendant, LANDR Audio Inc. (NEQ: 1168758879), is a federally incorporated Canadian company with a head office in Montreal, Quebec, providing digital audio software and services.
2. The Contract
On or about [Date of Purchase], the Plaintiff purchased a retail license for [Name of Software, e.g., LANDR Mastering Plugin] from the Defendant for the sum of $[Amount Paid]. The terms of the sale, as presented at the time of purchase, specified that this was a perpetual license, granting the Plaintiff indefinite use of the software version purchased without the requirement of a recurring subscription.
3. The Breach of Contract
On or about [Date Access Was Cut], the Defendant unilaterally disabled the Plaintiff’s access to the software and/or refused to provide the necessary authorization/license server access required for the software to function. The Defendant has informed the Plaintiff that they will no longer honor the retail-sold perpetual license and instead require the Plaintiff to [e.g., pay for a monthly subscription / buy a new version] to regain access to the tools they already purchased.
4. Failure to Rectify
The Plaintiff has contacted the Defendant’s support team on multiple occasions (see attached Exhibit A: Correspondence) to request restoration of the licensed services. The Defendant has refused to honor the original terms of the agreement. A formal demand letter was sent on [Date of Demand Letter] and was [ignored / rejected].
5. Damages
As a result of the Defendant’s breach of contract, the Plaintiff has suffered the following damages:
Direct Loss: The original purchase price of $180 + Court costs
Replacement Cost: The cost of acquiring equivalent software to replace the functionality lost due to the Defendant's breach, totaling $[Amount].
Total Claim: The Plaintiff claims the sum of $[Total Amount] plus pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and the costs of this proceeding.
Tips for your Attachments (Exhibits)
When you file this online or at the 75 Mulcaster St. courthouse, you must attach copies of your evidence. Label them clearly:
Exhibit A: Your original purchase receipt or "Thank you for your order" email.
Exhibit B: Any marketing material or EULA screenshots you have that use the word "Perpetual" or "Buy" (as opposed to "Subscribe").
Exhibit C: The email thread where they told you they aren't honoring the license.
Exhibit D: A copy of the Demand Letter you sent them and the registered mail tracking receipt.
A Note on the "Consumer Protection Act"
If LANDR tries to argue that you have to sue them in Quebec because of their Terms of Service, you should mention in your hearing that under Section 7(1) of the Ontario Consumer Protection Act, any term in a consumer contract that tries to prevent you from taking a legal over a dispute in an Ontario court is not binding on you.
Would you like me to draft a quick "Demand Letter" for you to send via registered mail before you officially file the court papers? (The court usually likes to see that you gave them one last chance to fix it.)
7
Reason Studios / Re: can a software company be taken to small claims court for not honouring licenses
« Last post by chrisNova777 on May 07, 2026, 08:01:57 AM »Quote
LANDR Studios
20 Monique-Vanier Street, Rigaud (Quebec) J0P1P0 Canada
Company number (NEQ)
2269658300
Company status
Removed upon request
Status update date
2025-02-19
Name status
Prior
Start date of name
2018-04-23
Name's end date
2025-02-19
LANDR Studios
20 Monique-Vanier Street, Rigaud (Quebec) J0P1P0 Canada
Company number (NEQ)
2269658300
Company status
Removed upon request
Status update date
2025-02-19
Name status
Prior
Start date of name
2018-04-23
Name's end date
2025-02-19
LANDR AUDIO INC.
809-160 Saint-Viateur Street East, Montreal, Quebec H2T1A8 Canada
Company number (NEQ)
1168758879
Company status
Removed from office
Status update date
2019-12-20
Name status
Prior
Start date of name
2015-05-01
Name's end date
2019-12-20
LANDR AUDIO INC.
2100-1001 Robert-Bourassa Blvd., Montreal, Quebec H3B4L4 Canada
Company number (NEQ)
1175102061
Company status
Registered
Status update date
2019-12-20
Name status
In effect
Start date of name
2019-12-20
Name's end date
8
Reason Studios / Re: can a software company be taken to small claims court for not honouring licenses
« Last post by chrisNova777 on May 07, 2026, 07:59:10 AM »yes i do have evidence that the box was sealed as the photo from the ebay listing demonstrates this celarly
The fact that you have clear photo evidence of the shrink-wrapped box from the eBay listing is your "smoking gun." In a legal context, this evidence effectively shifts the burden of proof to the company. They are claiming the code was used; you have visual proof that the physical source of that code was untampered with until it reached your hands.
Here is how you can use that evidence to win, along with the specific rules for Ontario and Quebec as of 2026.
1. Leverage the "Sealed Box" Evidence
In court, this photo functions as proof of Condition of Sale.
The Argument: "The product was sold as 'New/Sealed.' Since the registration code is inside the sealed packaging, it is mathematically and physically impossible for a third party to have used it. Therefore, the failure to activate is either a database error on the company's part or a defective product."
Consumer Protection: Under the Ontario Consumer Protection Act, if a product doesn't work as advertised (i.e., it won't launch), it is a breach of the implied warranty of fitness.
2. The Quebec Advantage (Bill 29 / Section 38)
Since the company is in Quebec, they are subject to very strict new laws regarding software and hardware functionality.
Anti-Obsolescence: As of late 2024/2025, Quebec significantly strengthened laws (Bill 29) that prohibit companies from "killing" older products.
The "Used" Excuse: If they are using the "already used" excuse to avoid supporting legacy software activation servers, they are potentially violating Quebec's laws against planned obsolescence.
3. Your Action Plan
Since support is ignoring you, stop being "the customer" and start being "the claimant."
Step A: The Final Warning (via Registered Mail)
Send a physical letter to their head office in Quebec.
"I have reached out to your support team [Number] times regarding my legally purchased, shrink-wrapped retail copy of [Software Name]. I have photographic evidence from the point of sale proving the item was factory sealed. Your claim that the code was 'previously used' is factually impossible.
If a working activation code or a full refund is not provided within 14 days, I will:
File a claim in the Ontario Small Claims Court for the full replacement value.
File a formal complaint with the Office de la protection du consommateur (Quebec) for a violation of the Consumer Protection Act."
Step B: Filing the Claim
If they still don't answer, go to the Ontario Small Claims e-filing portal.
Filing Fee: It currently costs $108 to file a claim in Ontario. You can include this fee in the amount you are suing for.
Jurisdiction: Because you are the consumer in Ontario and the "harm" (the software failing) happened in Barrie, the Ontario court has jurisdiction.
4. Comparison of Claims
Evidence Why it wins
eBay Photo Proves the company's "used code" defense is a lie/error.
Support Logs Proves you tried to be reasonable and they "ghosted" you.
Bill of Sale Proves the contract exists.
The fact that you have clear photo evidence of the shrink-wrapped box from the eBay listing is your "smoking gun." In a legal context, this evidence effectively shifts the burden of proof to the company. They are claiming the code was used; you have visual proof that the physical source of that code was untampered with until it reached your hands.
Here is how you can use that evidence to win, along with the specific rules for Ontario and Quebec as of 2026.
1. Leverage the "Sealed Box" Evidence
In court, this photo functions as proof of Condition of Sale.
The Argument: "The product was sold as 'New/Sealed.' Since the registration code is inside the sealed packaging, it is mathematically and physically impossible for a third party to have used it. Therefore, the failure to activate is either a database error on the company's part or a defective product."
Consumer Protection: Under the Ontario Consumer Protection Act, if a product doesn't work as advertised (i.e., it won't launch), it is a breach of the implied warranty of fitness.
2. The Quebec Advantage (Bill 29 / Section 38)
Since the company is in Quebec, they are subject to very strict new laws regarding software and hardware functionality.
Anti-Obsolescence: As of late 2024/2025, Quebec significantly strengthened laws (Bill 29) that prohibit companies from "killing" older products.
The "Used" Excuse: If they are using the "already used" excuse to avoid supporting legacy software activation servers, they are potentially violating Quebec's laws against planned obsolescence.
3. Your Action Plan
Since support is ignoring you, stop being "the customer" and start being "the claimant."
Step A: The Final Warning (via Registered Mail)
Send a physical letter to their head office in Quebec.
"I have reached out to your support team [Number] times regarding my legally purchased, shrink-wrapped retail copy of [Software Name]. I have photographic evidence from the point of sale proving the item was factory sealed. Your claim that the code was 'previously used' is factually impossible.
If a working activation code or a full refund is not provided within 14 days, I will:
File a claim in the Ontario Small Claims Court for the full replacement value.
File a formal complaint with the Office de la protection du consommateur (Quebec) for a violation of the Consumer Protection Act."
Step B: Filing the Claim
If they still don't answer, go to the Ontario Small Claims e-filing portal.
Filing Fee: It currently costs $108 to file a claim in Ontario. You can include this fee in the amount you are suing for.
Jurisdiction: Because you are the consumer in Ontario and the "harm" (the software failing) happened in Barrie, the Ontario court has jurisdiction.
4. Comparison of Claims
Evidence Why it wins
eBay Photo Proves the company's "used code" defense is a lie/error.
Support Logs Proves you tried to be reasonable and they "ghosted" you.
Bill of Sale Proves the contract exists.
9
Reason Studios / Re: can a software company be taken to small claims court for not honouring licenses
« Last post by chrisNova777 on May 07, 2026, 07:55:39 AM »the support staff claimed that the registration code was previously used but yet i had purchased a shrink wrapped retail box on ebay
The fact that the company is claiming the code was "previously used"—even though you bought a shrink-wrapped box—is a classic legal pivot point. This changes the argument from a simple "denial of service" to a dispute over the validity of the product and the rights of resale.
Since you are in Barrie dealing with a Quebec firm, here is how you should handle this specific "used code" defense.
1. The Legal Reality of "Shrink-Wrapped" Resale
In Canada, the "First Sale Doctrine" (or exhaustion of rights) generally means that once a company sells a physical copy of software, they lose the right to control the redistribution of that specific physical copy.
The "Used" Defense: If the box was truly factory-sealed (shrink-wrapped) when you got it, the registration code cannot have been used unless:
The company’s database is incorrect.
A "key generator" or hacker used the code randomly.
The company sold you a "perpetual" license but is now trying to treat it as a non-transferable service.
Your Counter-Argument: You are a "Bona Fide Purchaser" of a physical good. If the code doesn't work, the product is "not as described" and is defective. Under the Ontario Consumer Protection Act, a merchant cannot sell a product that is fundamentally unusable for its intended purpose.
2. Immediate Action: The eBay Safety Net
Before filing in Small Claims Court, check your dates.
eBay Money Back Guarantee: If it has been less than 30 days since delivery, stop arguing with the software company and open an "Item Not as Described" case on eBay. eBay almost always sides with the buyer when a software key is "already used," and they will force a refund.
Credit Card Chargeback: If eBay's window has passed but you paid via credit card within the last 60–90 days, you can file a dispute for "Services not received" or "Defective merchandise."
3. If You Proceed to Small Claims
If you want the software (not just a refund) or if the windows above have closed, your Small Claims case should focus on these three points:
Breach of Warranty of Fitness: In Ontario and Quebec, goods must be fit for the purpose for which they are intended. Software that cannot be activated is not "fit."
The "Shrink-Wrap" Evidence: You need to prove the item was new. Do you have the eBay listing showing it was "Brand New/Sealed"? Do you have photos of the box before you opened it? This destroys their argument that a previous owner used the code.
The Quebec "Planed Obsolescence" Angle: Quebec’s Consumer Protection Act (Section 38) prohibits "planned obsolescence." If the company has intentionally deactivated old keys to force people onto new versions, they are in hot water in a Quebec court.
4. Your Next Message to Them (The "Final Notice")
Since they aren't answering, send one final email/letter with this specific phrasing. It signals that you know the law:
"I am a resident of Ontario and the holder of a factory-sealed retail license for [Software Name]. Your claim that the code is 'previously used' is factually impossible as the product was shrink-wrapped. Under the Ontario Consumer Protection Act and Quebec's Civil Code, you are required to provide a product that is functional.
If this is not resolved by [Date], I will be filing a complaint with the Office de la protection du consommateur (Quebec) and initiating a claim in Small Claims Court. I will be seeking the full retail value of the current version of the software as damages for breach of contract."
The fact that the company is claiming the code was "previously used"—even though you bought a shrink-wrapped box—is a classic legal pivot point. This changes the argument from a simple "denial of service" to a dispute over the validity of the product and the rights of resale.
Since you are in Barrie dealing with a Quebec firm, here is how you should handle this specific "used code" defense.
1. The Legal Reality of "Shrink-Wrapped" Resale
In Canada, the "First Sale Doctrine" (or exhaustion of rights) generally means that once a company sells a physical copy of software, they lose the right to control the redistribution of that specific physical copy.
The "Used" Defense: If the box was truly factory-sealed (shrink-wrapped) when you got it, the registration code cannot have been used unless:
The company’s database is incorrect.
A "key generator" or hacker used the code randomly.
The company sold you a "perpetual" license but is now trying to treat it as a non-transferable service.
Your Counter-Argument: You are a "Bona Fide Purchaser" of a physical good. If the code doesn't work, the product is "not as described" and is defective. Under the Ontario Consumer Protection Act, a merchant cannot sell a product that is fundamentally unusable for its intended purpose.
2. Immediate Action: The eBay Safety Net
Before filing in Small Claims Court, check your dates.
eBay Money Back Guarantee: If it has been less than 30 days since delivery, stop arguing with the software company and open an "Item Not as Described" case on eBay. eBay almost always sides with the buyer when a software key is "already used," and they will force a refund.
Credit Card Chargeback: If eBay's window has passed but you paid via credit card within the last 60–90 days, you can file a dispute for "Services not received" or "Defective merchandise."
3. If You Proceed to Small Claims
If you want the software (not just a refund) or if the windows above have closed, your Small Claims case should focus on these three points:
Breach of Warranty of Fitness: In Ontario and Quebec, goods must be fit for the purpose for which they are intended. Software that cannot be activated is not "fit."
The "Shrink-Wrap" Evidence: You need to prove the item was new. Do you have the eBay listing showing it was "Brand New/Sealed"? Do you have photos of the box before you opened it? This destroys their argument that a previous owner used the code.
The Quebec "Planed Obsolescence" Angle: Quebec’s Consumer Protection Act (Section 38) prohibits "planned obsolescence." If the company has intentionally deactivated old keys to force people onto new versions, they are in hot water in a Quebec court.
4. Your Next Message to Them (The "Final Notice")
Since they aren't answering, send one final email/letter with this specific phrasing. It signals that you know the law:
"I am a resident of Ontario and the holder of a factory-sealed retail license for [Software Name]. Your claim that the code is 'previously used' is factually impossible as the product was shrink-wrapped. Under the Ontario Consumer Protection Act and Quebec's Civil Code, you are required to provide a product that is functional.
If this is not resolved by [Date], I will be filing a complaint with the Office de la protection du consommateur (Quebec) and initiating a claim in Small Claims Court. I will be seeking the full retail value of the current version of the software as damages for breach of contract."
10
Reason Studios / Re: can a software company be taken to small claims court for not honouring licenses
« Last post by chrisNova777 on May 07, 2026, 07:19:05 AM »This situation is particularly notable because LANDR recently acquired Reason Studios (early 2026). When one company buys another, they generally inherit all existing legal obligations and contracts—meaning they cannot simply "turn off" retail licenses people paid for under the previous ownership without a valid legal reason.
If you are based in Ontario (as my system notes suggest), you are protected by some of the strongest consumer laws in North America.
Why Your Case is Strong
Successorship Liability: LANDR bought Reason Studios. Legally, they didn't just buy the assets; they bought the responsibilities. If Reason Studios sold you a perpetual license, LANDR is generally required to honor it.
Ontario Consumer Protection Act (CPA): Under the CPA, any ambiguity in a consumer contract is interpreted in favor of the consumer. If you bought a "retail package," the reasonable expectation is that it works as advertised on the box.
Unfair Practices: Denying access to a paid-for product while likely trying to push users toward a subscription (Reason+) can be argued as an "unfair practice" under Section 14 of the CPA.
Tactical Steps for Small Claims Court
Since you are dealing with two entities that recently merged, your "defendant" in a claim would typically be LANDR Audio Inc. (the parent company).
If you are based in Ontario (as my system notes suggest), you are protected by some of the strongest consumer laws in North America.
Why Your Case is Strong
Successorship Liability: LANDR bought Reason Studios. Legally, they didn't just buy the assets; they bought the responsibilities. If Reason Studios sold you a perpetual license, LANDR is generally required to honor it.
Ontario Consumer Protection Act (CPA): Under the CPA, any ambiguity in a consumer contract is interpreted in favor of the consumer. If you bought a "retail package," the reasonable expectation is that it works as advertised on the box.
Unfair Practices: Denying access to a paid-for product while likely trying to push users toward a subscription (Reason+) can be argued as an "unfair practice" under Section 14 of the CPA.
Tactical Steps for Small Claims Court
Since you are dealing with two entities that recently merged, your "defendant" in a claim would typically be LANDR Audio Inc. (the parent company).