"SpatialOS is a cloud-based computational platform that lets you use many servers and engines to power a single world. The platform coordinates a swarm of micro-services called workers, which overlap and dynamically reorganize to power a huge, seamless world. The platform also lets you handle a huge number of concurrent players across different devices in one world" I'm planning on releasing something like this, with…
(Unity employee here) While I can't comment on legal specifics, the controversy is entirely about Improbable's server-side use of Unity, so you should be fine. That said, you can send us an email (with details of your specific situation) on terms@unity3d.com and our team can clarify. (You can also wait and see, as we'll be updating the ToS again, as they're evidently much too vague at the moment...)
I was planning to implement automated gameplay video/stream production from recorded server-side player data. However, I was planning on using a Javascript game engine running in Chrome for this, not Unity. I'll keep the terms email address in mind.
That's either a dead project or it's moved somewhere that I can't find it. Either way it's not something I'd trust enough to use for a commercial project, so I definitely wouldn't say UE supports C#.
No its still there. You just need to first get access to the Unreal Github repo to be able to see it since its a private repo (by signing up for an UE engine dev, it takes a couple minutes). This is mentioned on the linked site: "You will need source access to Unreal Engine on GitHub to get access to the MonoUE fork".
I did some digging around, I can't tell how active this project is, but given how little I found, this definitely isn't something I'd feel confident using outside of small experiments.
I wouldn't go around telling people UE4 supports C# based on this.
Unity's official response: https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improba...
Reading between the lines, it sounds like they only want the game developer to be running Unity on the server, not any other third party. Does this create an opportunity for a professional services outfit to provide maintenance and support for running cloud servers rented by the game developer? Can I put an AMI up in the AWS marketplace and charge for it?
That's what their PR people say, but that isn't what their terms and conditions actually do say... "2.4 Streaming and Cloud Gaming Restrictions.
You may not directly or indirectly distribute the Unity Software, including the runtime portion of the Unity Software (the 'Unity Runtime'), or your Project Content (if it incorporates the Unity Runtime) by means of streaming or broadcasting so that any portion of the Unity Software is primarily executed on or simulated by the cloud or a remote server and transmitted over the Internet or other network to end user devices without a separate license or authorization from Unity..."
Unity's CTO responds: https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improba... "If a game developer runs a Unity-based game server on their own servers or generic cloud instances (like GCP, AWS or Azure), they are covered by our EULA."
Funny, that isn't what their EULA says "2.4 Streaming and Cloud Gaming Restrictions.
You may not directly or indirectly distribute the Unity Software, including the runtime portion of the Unity Software (the 'Unity Runtime'), or your Project Content (if it incorporates the Unity Runtime) by means of streaming or broadcasting so that any portion of the Unity Software is primarily executed on or simulated by the cloud or a remote server and transmitted over the Internet or other network to end user devices without a separate license or authorization from Unity..."
Improbable's response: https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/unity-blocks-s... "Worryingly, this change occurred during an open commercial negotiation with the company to find a way to do more together." So they had an ongoing negotiation and Unity just went ahead and made the change? Yikes. Also kudos to Improbable for setting up an emergency fund for partners affected by this.
Unity's response, saying that Improbable is incorrect: https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improba...
The relevant portion of Unity's EULA which says that they their PR folks are incorrect "2.4 Streaming and Cloud Gaming Restrictions.
You may not directly or indirectly distribute the Unity Software, including the runtime portion of the Unity Software (the 'Unity Runtime'), or your Project Content (if it incorporates the Unity Runtime) by means of streaming or broadcasting so that any portion of the Unity Software is primarily executed on or simulated by the cloud or a remote server and transmitted over the Internet or other network to end user devices without a separate license or authorization from Unity..."
Yes they are running unity runtime on their servers, there is nothing in the TOS against that, what is illegal is to share any of the data from that runtime online with other Unity instances. Which has nothing to do with "re-distributing" Unity has a SAAS.
Re-distributing was the wrong word to use. But it seems to me that the Unity Runtime is a part of the stack of their SaaS.
The EULA bans any SDK, not specifically the GDK which presumably includes some part of Unity in a re-distributable form. If it was only banning the GDK, then developers who want to use SpatialOS could integrate the SDK on their own just like someone who uses CryEngine or builds their own engine instead of using either Unity or Unreal for which the GDKs were created to streamline the process. But the EULA doesn't stop at using Unity on the cloud with an SDK, it bans all use of Unity running on the cloud. "2.4 Streaming and Cloud Gaming Restrictions.
You may not directly or indirectly distribute the Unity Software, including the runtime portion of the Unity Software (the “Unity Runtime”), or your Project Content (if it incorporates the Unity Runtime) by means of streaming or broadcasting so that any portion of the Unity Software is primarily executed on or simulated by the cloud or a remote server and transmitted over the Internet or other network to end user devices without a separate license or authorization from Unity. Without limiting the foregoing, you may not use a managed service running on cloud infrastructure (a “Managed Service”) or a specific integration of a binary add-on (for example, a plugin or SDK) or source code to be integrated in the Unity Software or Your Project Content incorporating the Unity Runtime (an “SDK Integration”) to install or execute the Unity Runtime on the cloud or a remote server, unless such use of the Managed Service or SDK Integration has been specifically authorized by Unity. Additionally, you may not integrate the Unity Runtime with a Managed Service or SDK Integration and offer that integration to third parties for the purpose of installing or using the Unity Runtime on the cloud or a remote server. For a list of Unity authorized streaming platforms, Managed Services and SDK Integrations, click here.This restriction does not prevent end users from remotely accessing your Project Content from an end user device that is running on another end user device. You may not use a third party to directly or indirectly distribute or make available, stream, broadcast (through simulation or otherwise) any portion of the Unity Software unless that third party is authorized by Unity to provide such services."
The CEO of Unity is the former CEO of Electronic Arts. I do believe that he might be executing the same business practices on Unity's developers as EA did on their customers. The first time I saw their CEO choice I thought that this can't be good for the dev community around Unity. Here is a question, even though Unity is incorporated in the US, did anyone find the filings with the SEC? Or is it not required for and…
Incorporation doesn't mean you need SEC filings. You're thinking of going public.
Basically, if you can't go buy a company's stock, they probably don't have public filings with the SEC.