#ok
1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)
Well I guess this discussion is dead 😅
same 🙂
was fun
I can actually make a suggestion on forums for the non-commercial group license
but carwash is right that is very hard to enforce
It for sure would be. I do wonder how it is usually enforced? After all, a lot of of open source software is not cleared for commercial use. How is that enforced?
by people that have access to the code I guess
whistleblowers? haha
I mean every company has some degree of leakage
that's just how code works
you want everyone in your company to know how the project works if you're going to code well
The EULA basically says when you purchase the asset, you're using it. There's no grey area. Unity does not enforce seats, and publishers have no way of enforcing it since unity does not share buyer data.
While free assets would be the best thing ever for hobby, beginner, and amateurs users... It's completely selfish request. No publisher can make a sustainable business selling assets for free. If building a service, you're also hosed since Unity does not allow custom licenses for average publishers, does not allow DRM, does not allow remote updates and does not share any user credentials or rights.
wdym Unity does not enforce seats?
Unity makes no effort to enforce the license rules.
you can run 5 projects with the asset despite having 1 license?
and unity doesn't stop you?
They do literally nothing, and publishers have no data to do the enforcement themselves.
ouch
When you purchase something, you can download the files, then get a refund for some obscure reason and keep the files if you want.
Or just download that same file from some pirate site, because there's zero DRM or copy protection. It's just files.
but... if the current licenses are not enforced... what's the problem with more complex licenses?
What do you mean?
this argument/thread is basically about whether asset creators should be allowed (as an option) to make different licenses for commercial and non-commercial use
but it sure went down a rabbit hole haha
not even companies?
Apparently not, publishers have recently started using discord bots and other means to start validating invoices and the support requests coming from Studios are single user licenses.
Like "Hey can you help us out with this thing our team is trying to do with the asset?" and then ask them for an invoice number, which comes back valid, but for a single seat. How do you have a team with a single seat license?
then what happens lol
Most publishers just help them anyway, maybe mention that they're breaking the EULA by not owning a multiseat license.
Generally no one takes it well, assuming that support is free forever or something insane like that.
Support actually takes a significant amount of time, which pulls away from paying contracts, marketing, or working on updates/new assets.