The following is a quote from the VSL newsletter of November 12, 2004:
"When registering your First Edition, you are automatically entitled to all privileges of the Vienna Symphonic Library VIP program and therefore eligible to upgrade to the PRO EDITION for the reduced VIP price at any later date." (emphasis mine)
I wish I could find some of VSL's advertising copy of that era which expounded the virtues of the VIP program and stated that your "investment" in the library would always be protected by the VIP program.(People who purchase licenses for sample libraries are indeed making "investments" in their work and businesses - - as well as making an investment in the company from which they purchased the license!!)
One might guess that, if the advertisements had, instead of promising an always available upgrade path through the VIP program, expounded the pseudo- legalistic argument propounded by DG (who states: "For a start, there is no investment. You
have a non-transferable licence, that's all. It has no value, except to
you. This is not an investment.") sales would not have been nearly as brisk as they were.
However, if one really wants to get legalistic (not something I reccommend) about all this, the VIP program - once highly touted by VSL as a major selling point - - might be considered part of a contract between the customer and VSL - - so that VSL's decision to end the VIP program might be then construed to constitute a breach of that contract.
I want to emphasize that this decsion does not affect me since I never owned the Pro Edition. I am happy with VSL's products and have the greatest respect for their work and their committment to excellence. For me this decision is problematic as a matter of principle and as a classic example of a poor business decision. The problem is that this decision breaks a promise that was explicitly given to VSL's customers and, thereby, very palpably harms the trust between VSL and its customers. That this is its effect is evidenced by the comments on this thread.
People simply don't like it when one party to a deal unilaterally changes the terms.