In a conversation with a representative of a fairly large, well-known company that sells art assets in both the asset store and their own store, I was told that they have produced a new EULA - which applies retroactively - based on their consultations with Unity. This new EULA forbids micro-transactions in games that use their art, and they are telling me that this is based on what Unity has told them about Unity's own restriction against micro-transactions. Their new EULA, which they say is based on what they were told by Unity, states: Additional restrictions. Use of the Content in any of the following ways is not allowed under this Agreement, and would require User to obtain additional rights other than those granted under this agreement: Distribution or transfer in any way (including, without, limitation by way of sublicense) other way than as integrated components of electronic games and interactive media. Delivery, unlocking, or other methods of availability of Content from User or User’s applications that require an end user to make a financial transaction to either buy access to or use of the content, or which require a financial transaction for some other credit, item, or status which is then used to gain access to or use of the Content other than the initial purchase and installation of such an application made available by User. They say this is based on Unity's own restrictions on the use of UAS content in games, as found in the following paragraph of the Unity EULA: 2.2.1 Non-Restricted Assets. The following concerns only Assets that are not Restricted Assets: Licensor grants to the END-USER a non-exclusive, worldwide, and perpetual license to the Asset to integrate Assets only as incorporated and embedded components of electronic games and interactive media and distribute such electronic game and interactive media. Except for game services software development kits (“Services SDKs”), END-USERS may modify Assets. END-USER may otherwise not reproduce, distribute, sublicense, rent, lease or lend the Assets. It is emphasized that the END-USERS shall not be entitled to distribute or transfer in any way (including, without, limitation by way of sublicense) the Assets in any other way than as integrated components of electronic games and interactive media. Without limitation of the foregoing it is emphasized that END-USER shall not be entitled to share the costs related to purchasing an Asset and then let any third party that has contributed to such purchase use such Asset (forum pooling). In reading this, I don't see any restrictions to be applied to game developers on the assets they use in games. What I see is Unity simply saying that assets purchased in the store cannot be re-sold, given away, or shared, but the buyer has a perpetual license for the art be used in games. Nothing at all about micro-transactions. But I'm told I have this wrong, and the asset store vendor is cautioning those who have already purchased the art, saying that it cannot be used in games with more than just the original financial transaction. I can't see that functioning for many games. As I explained to the vendor's representative, it appears to forbid the use of the company's art in games made according to many popular business models, such as: 1) games that are free, but which charge players a fee for delivery of additional content; 2) games that have an original paid-for module, and then additional expansion modules; and 3) games sold on a subscription model, where players are encouraged to pay a monthly fee, and in turn receive periodic updates, new content, and rewards that enable them to unlock new gear in-game. So I need a statement on this, from published Unity users, and preferably someone from the Unity team who knows the intention of the UAS EULA. Does Unity restrict the use of store-bought assets such that they can only be used in games with an original purchase price, and no further financial transactions?