random elm
This Unity TOS line blocks freelancers from using Free/Plus/Pro for large companies..
any news if this is getting fixed?
"If you are a legal entity using the Unity Software, then your Total Finances are: (a) if you are providing services to a third party, your customers’ or clients’ gross revenues and/or funding (no matter what the source)"
*its not possible to buy or ask customer to buy pro or industrial license per project, often project total price is smaller than license..
devout harbor
Unity pro is 1877 euros per year. If you are a freelancer working for big corporations you should be able to afford that.
random elm
if its one off small project, that wont be possible. (imagine doing 1000eur project from Upwork, then asking for 1900eur extra for license fees..)
so to clarify,
my request would be that total finances for freelancers/work for hire etc. would be from your own income your own company income, not from customers finances. (i think unreal engine has that kind of system too)
and for industry that is 4554eur license..
devout harbor
The industry license has nothing to do with what you are discussing. That license simply gives you a Pixyz access and much better support. Are you confused that you need a license per project? I mean sure if you do one upwork gig worth 1000 euros for the whole year it doesn’t add up.
random elm
Yup, it doesnt work for freelancer at the moment.
Read the TOS, your license depends on Customer total finances. (so if customer is industry class, you'd have to buy that license)
also unity specifically said that in industry webinary, that freelancer is required to get industry license.
relevant forum thread if i'm not explaining it clearly: https://forum.unity.com/threads/question-to-unity-industry-changes.1420997/
lofty ridge
This Unity TOS line blocks freelancers from using Free/Plus/Pro for large compan...
wait, this is only for like, industrial/non-game dev purposes. I thought this was affecting free lance game devs... idk i feel like your should've specified that
also, i find it unfortunate (and kinda funny) that one of the replies in the thread your posted is "If I'm not mistaken the only choice if you want to completely avoid custom licensing is Unreal Engine" considering now that epic is doing the same thing for Non-game dev uses of the engine
random elm
oh good point, i forgot the game dev side!
Yeah, for non games UE5 will have license fees.. but their TOS at still allows work for hire and freelancers to use UE5, without considering customers total finances. (but that is still side topic, hoping that unity could fix this for themselves)
strange bough
makes total sense.
It works very well for Freelancers, but your client does either have to pay you fair or they pay for the seat!
Specially for industrial Collection, either the project makes sense and has a good budget or you can use alternatives* (with unity assets)* to the industrial collection that are not needing the industrial toolkit.
Otherwise big company pay you pennies and you have to pay the license *indy price... so they safe money and you earn nothing.
you also can't use megascans or any epic tool if you work for a client that has a certain revenue. your client will have to buy the license and you give you a seat. (there is other license if you use it for renderings, do im not 100% informed about how exactly)
It was always like that since the beginning of the merger at epic, so dont fall into the pit by thinking its cheaper, we had this encounter with Epic and we stopped using megascans for large clients if they dont wanna pay the license. Do this upfront dont go afterwards its not legally!
if you do freelance work for a large company and you dont get enough to pay fees or seats, thy must give you the seat otherwise they are ripping you off
lofty ridge
if you do freelance work for a large company and you dont get enough to pay fees...
Yeeeaaaaa I was gonna say I don't know much about free lancing but surely either your company/client would give ya a seat or pay you enough to offset the license?
strange bough
Yeeeaaaaa I was gonna say I don't know much about free lancing but surely either...
either they cover the cost of developing for them or something is not right.
lofty ridge
Yea
random elm
that's not happening in reality (unless its big project or company already has unity licenses to assign for you).
i mean of course you could ask extra fee to pay license, but if you are working on UpWork or other freelance sites,
you would lose every offer that way. **Question is: **imagine if project is 1-3k budged, how to add extra license fee there?
lofty ridge
that's not happening in reality (unless its big project or company already has u...
Work for bigger companies only
Ezpz, problem solved
strange bough
that's not happening in reality (unless its big project or company already has u...
if you tell that company how licenses work they will have to concider.
Otherwise you tell them to give you a untiy personal seat, then it is their own doing.
it is a principle either your client has the budget and a certain revenue or not. But by just agreeing and using your license you agree to take their part of the responsibility.
You will have this with every license model on any DCC or Engine, Library or Service.
hollow dove
Yup, it doesnt work for freelancer at the moment.
Read the TOS, your license de...
This makes sense to me on the principal level. If you're doing any contractual work, you're not an indie dev anymore, it's a matter of engaging with any party within the industry that imposes particular requirements as per client's demands.
It sounds a bit strange to me seeing someone to be worried over non-game pricings, all the while seeing other people expressing dissatisfaction of Unity's development directions. In any case, as someone who just recently switched to Unity, I find current pricings acceptable for Unity's overall quality and adoption in the industry, even as a freelancer.
hollow dove
Yes, in order to survive, all these engines are bound to offer prices that are acceptable to existing and potential users. That's how competition and capitalism work! 😁
The concern that people expressed about Unity's somewhat demanding pricing could actually signify Unity's plans to cater to the professional segment more than ever. And I understand those concerns. But to me, this is really good, since I've been stuck with using hobbyist game engines out there. But yeah, I do realize that Unity may not be for everyone now, and that's fine.
lofty ridge
Yes, in order to survive, all these engines are bound to offer prices that are a...
There's an argument to be had about how capitalism is the root to all these bad decisions from unity and how it needs to stop being dumb, but that's outta the scope of this server
hollow dove
There's an argument to be had about how capitalism is the root to all these bad ...
This kind of narrative is unproductive to the Unity community.
lofty ridge
This kind of narrative is unproductive to the Unity community.
ye, hence why it's outta scope
finite mountain
This kind of narrative is unproductive to the Unity community.
spoken like a true community representative
hollow dove
spoken like a true community representative
There's currently a disinformation campaign circulating on the Internet, suggesting that Unity's company structure is the sole cause of its so-called fiasco—an obvious exaggeration. The same argument could literally be applied to any other commercial company, like Unreal, which is ridiculous. Typically, these disinformation campaigns against corporations are initiated by overzealous FOSS advocates who infiltrate these companies, including Unity. In reality, it doesn't matter whether a project is FOSS or commercial, as deception may exist in any structure.
Perhaps you've noticed how FOSS folks were promoting a specific game engine all over Unity forums. However, advocating for FOSS as the ultimate solution is not the answer to concrete problems. The liberal license does not guarantee freedom, as free cheese can also be found in mousetraps. For example, when FOSS project leadership operates both non-profit and for-profit entities in the same person—allegedly separate but creating an apparent conflict of interest between such entities—one should be cautious when considering which tools to invest one's life in. That's just common sense.
If what I say positions me as a true community representative of Unity, yeah, that's great to hear in either case. I may use your words to appeal to become a Unity community moderator. 🙃
finite mountain
man i sure hope you will decide for everyone what is productive and what is disinformation, you sound unbiased
hollow dove
man i sure hope you will decide for everyone what is productive and what is disi...
I don't impose any particular viewpoint, and everything I say is my own opinion on the matter, backed with arguments. You can choose to challenge them if you wish. We can discuss the licensing of Unity in relation to whatever concern you might have. Are you ready for a discussion? What would you like to discuss on the topic as per this thread?
finite mountain
nothing
