Peter, I’m under no illusion that this works for you and that they have been doing it since before Dorico. Just because someone has been doing something doesn’t mean they should continue to. Just apply that to world history for a moment to prove that point.
I respect that it works for you. But I believe it’s reasonable to state that it doesn’t for me and defend why I believe it’s a practice that has poor results for users and even for Steinberg. I left Steinberg for another. I use a different DAW without this trouble. They make money. I have a great experience with them. So there is no necessity involved here. If they care about retention and growth and good visibility, why continue to do something more people hate than respect?
I respect different opinions. But I also believe in engaging my own views with those who have something else to offer. That way my life is polished by those around me. I call it “working together” 
I just wish Steinberg was doing more about this. The thing is, you’re talking to someone who wasn’t keen with the dongle since well before Dorico. I respect many things about Cubase. It just didn’t work out for me. I just want to see Dorico avoid what I believe are the mistakes in Stenberg’s past. If users didn’t voice themselves, progress would die. Change isn’t always progress, but progress always starts with engagement which brings change. The more we engage and hear out other people concerns, the more likely we find win-win solutions. That’s why I’m not only voicing my own beliefs, but bringing economic points into the picture as well. Those have little relevance to me as a user. However, they are entirely relevant to Steinberg and whether this practice benefits them enough to maintain a sour taste in people’s mouths, and deter many from buying in the first place. My hope would be that my engagement here is seen as a good and welcome thing for enticing improvement, not as a threat to Steinberg. After all, I’m proposing that this particular change would help Steinberg.
Microsoft Windows, Adobe Photoshop, and many others grew in popularity because of piracy. That’s a well known fact that even those companies acknowledge. They still try to limit it. But the manage it for good like a disability rather than treat it like cancer to be removed completely. That, their price, and their product all are what made them or kept them so successful and standard for users. If I owned Steinberg I wouldn’t love piracy of my hard work. But I would love even more if every music student, teacher, amateur, prosumer, and professional were using my product. Because then I at least have access to that size of user base. That can open up now money making potential for a company which not only allows then to regain what they lost, but the visibility and growth far outweigh the alternative. If 70% of your user base is pirating. Most all of them wouldn’t have paid anyway and would have pirated something else. But you gain a 233% addition in users that way, which means far more visibility, which means far more sales from those who don’t pirate. Bill Gates was smart because he saw it objectively and not through the lens of insecurity. There are many ways to make money with a large user base. There are far fewer ways to make money with a small one, especially a small one that is tethered down uncomfortably.
Cheers,
-Sean