Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

gamerbraves.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 180 posts

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#91

Post by yAak »

numpad0 wrote: post #69
heavyset_go wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't want developers choosing to target older Unity versions for their games, they want to milk cent they can out of their users.

That and/or they wanted to set up existing games. Something like 1 in 5 of top 50 iOS games, free-to-play and majority Asian(Chinese or Japanese), are making banks and on Unity. Personally I’m wondering if Chinese gamedev industry would “buy Godot” or do something to that effect. Japanese publishers won’t be able to do that nor would be willing to pay, so I’m guessing they’ll migrate existing to UE or wind down Unity…

Thankfully Godot is safe from acquisition: https://godotengine.org/governance/

(Or, at least they say they are.)

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#92

Post by brundolf »

harles wrote: post #89
brundolf wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL but isn't this what we have an FTC for? It feels like pretty blatantly unfair business dealings, particularly the fact that it's retroactive Literally "I am altering the deal, pray I do not alter it any further"

I hope so, but if it’s likely to get smacked down by the FTC, it’s unlikely Unity would try this path. I’m sure this has been in the works for a long time and all the backlash was anticipated - they just expect huge profits on the other side.

We'll see I guess! But even if it's not illegal the shortsightedness is staggering, which makes me question if leadership would have even foreseen legal problems

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#93

Post by moron4hire »

TheRoque wrote: post #87
perryizgr8 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say whatever you want in a contract. If the other party thinks it is illegal they take you to court and the judge decides.

But it means that their legal teams say that it's legit already, so that's why most people assume that this is legal.

A lawyer friend of mine once told me that most of his job as a contract lawyer was basically a game to see if the other company's lawyers were paying attention and to take absolutely everything he could if they weren't.

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#94

Post by dotnet00 »

zeroimpl wrote: post #56
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hate the word "silently" in headlines like these. Why hate reporting that fairly represents what they did? > How else are the supposed to do it? By throwing a press event? Sure. That's one way to uphold the standards of full transparency about what changes are happening and when - that Unity promised.

Deleting things never makes a sound. The word silently is added entirely for the connotation that it was meant to be secret. Since such an action would never go unnoticed, it's obvious that it wasn't meant to be secret, so that word is clearly misplaced. If the author wanted to imply it was bad, they should just come out and say it, with a word like despicably.

Silently doesn't have to literally mean without sound. When referring to written mediums it just means without notice. It implies that they hoped for it to go unnoticed because that's exactly it, if they weren't concerned about being secretive they'd take the time to announce it somewhere.

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#95

Post by internet101010 »

jskherman wrote: post #38
awesomeMilou wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Did Unity recently get acquired, new investors or new management? EA's former CEO, John Riccitiello took over last year. He inaugurated himself with quite a few statements, one of which was discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32097752

When it comes to games it's always EA, isn't it? Isn't this CEO the one also responsible for some of EA's notoriety?

Yes, he is the brain behind the 2013 SimCity disaster.

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#96

Post by tjpnz »

numpad0 wrote: post #69
heavyset_go wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't want developers choosing to target older Unity versions for their games, they want to milk cent they can out of their users.

That and/or they wanted to set up existing games. Something like 1 in 5 of top 50 iOS games, free-to-play and majority Asian(Chinese or Japanese), are making banks and on Unity. Personally I’m wondering if Chinese gamedev industry would “buy Godot” or do something to that effect. Japanese publishers won’t be able to do that nor would be willing to pay, so I’m guessing they’ll migrate existing to UE or wind down Unity…

Why couldn't Japanese publishers buy Godot (assuming that they even could)?

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#97

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

gmerc wrote: post #60
bhouston wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does appear to be what they want, but it is also very likely unenforcible retroactively. So it is likely that they are currently paying the steep repetitional costs of this move without making anywhere close to the additional income that they wanted from this move.

You are mistaking what the CEO and the VCs want with what a long term stable company would want. The incentives don’t work that way. The CEO gets his bonus and ability to sell shares if he pleases VCs and VCs are looking for bagholders for the company. So the CEO creates a revenue narrative to sell to institutional investors so they take an increasingly mediocre asset from the VCs at a premium. The pattern is all aro…

This comment makes no sense considering Unity is a publicly traded company.

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#98

Post by jibe »

dotnet00 wrote: post #94
zeroimpl wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deleting things never makes a sound. The word silently is added entirely for the connotation that it was meant to be secret. Since such an action would never go unnoticed, it's obvious that it wasn't meant to be secret, so that word is clearly misplaced. If the author wanted to imply it was bad, they should just come out and say it, with a word like despicably.

Silently doesn't have to literally mean without sound. When referring to written mediums it just means without notice. It implies that they hoped for it to go unnoticed because that's exactly it, if they weren't concerned about being secretive they'd take the time to announce it somewhere.

We have a word for this: metaphor! It is building the imagery of a thief silently sneaking into the GitHub offices, and stealing the terms of service.

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#99

Post by larusso »

whiddershins wrote: post #68
Clubber wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This retroactive stuff is insane and I cannot figure out how a company can make that type of move if they care about their users. If I understand you correctly (I haven't really been following this), they changed the contract and are trying to retroactively collect license fees for installs done prior to the change in contract? I don't think this is legal. When you change a contract, it's on a go forward bases. It w…

I have only been generally following this but I don’t think this is quite accurate. It seems more like, starting in 2024 when you get more downloads the fee would be applied. I see people talking here about apps that have a huge user base and a very low price per purchase. I admit that segment didn’t pop into my mind initially. And I see the problem there. I also imagine the Unity execs may have missed that scenario…

I believe the whole point and plan is that you use the Unity ad network exclusively. My understanding is that you get exempted then. Unity makes the most money with its Ad provider and would love to kill other ad mediation frameworks to get a bigger slice of the pie.

Re: Unity has seemingly silently removed its GitHub repo that tracks ToS changes

#100

Post by white_dragon88 »

CSSer wrote: post #59
glinkot wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of the old Simpsons ep where Homer realises their pet elephant costs a lot and decides to retrospectively update pricing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7uQNPS9v_VU

Wow, this should be higher. It’s perfect. I don’t think someone could even find an XKCD more relevant.

XKCD is super overrated. Cringe at times, banal at others.
Post reply on HN