How can you be sure that people aren't using a student license for Unity Assets?

It crossed my mind, how does anyone know that those models on the unity store wasn't created using a student version of Maya or 3DS Max?

And if it was, what would likely be the outcome? has anyone since been charged or sued by Autodesk for something like this?

 

I am not sure I understand this statement. What do you mean?

I am talking about like say someone is using a student copy of MAYA or a Pirated Copy from torrent or something. As I understand Autodesk has ways of checking assets to see if there is meta data and from this they can know what license was used to create it.

Surely they aren't just giving out these 3 year student licenses on their site by just creating a new fake email and creating a new account every 3 years? if they didn't have a way to verify this they would never have put up those student copies which happen to be 100% full retail copies its not like student versions are limited or anything like that.

So what happens when a person uploads a model on the unity store but these models were made with student copies or pirate cracked copies? what happens then? Autodesk will sue you for using it in your game through no fault of your own? what happens to the person who uploads these assets? has there ever been a case where Autodesk tried to sue an Indie Dev?

 

Misunderstood your question so I deleted my response. It happens occasionally when I'm not paying complete attention.

 

I wonder why Autodesk went down this route, they aren't even asking for School ID verification. Literally anyone can just go on Autodesk's website and download a $5000 USD software and create a new account and get 3 years for free. And when that 3 years end you create a new email and get another 3 years.

So essentially they are giving away all their software for free with the "hope" that people or companies aren't creating commercial assets for a profit? I bet over half of games on Android store was created using student or pirated Autodesk products, yet this company seems unaffected by this.

 

Whether they give a student license out to everyone who wishes to learn or not won't actually affect this. Someone inclined to use the software in this manner would do it regardless. Why download a student license after all when the pirated license is the exact same program minus one little difference?

Same reason that Unity took their Unity Indie tier (previously in the hundreds of dollars) and made it free. It attracts people.

 

You don't have any means of knowing that.

Where did you get that idea?
Autodesk may launch a lawsuit against whoever pirated the software. Unity store may decide to take down the asset.
That's it.

There were several anti-piracy cases, basically, occasionally a big company tries to make someone a scapegoat and sues them for ridiculous amount of money. I don't think that ever resulted for positive publicity for the company, though.

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/29/7948241/forever-21-pirating-photoshop-adobe-corel-autodesk

Occasionally it turns out ugly or silly:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3140160.stm
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...y-ad-corruption-scandal-erupts-response.shtml
http://www.zdnet.com/article/russians-prosecuting-teacher-who-installed-pirated-windows/

Someone who is big and uses pirated software for ocmmercial purposes is very likely to catch attention, be noticed by copyright owner and get a lawsuit. The rest depends on local laws and how well law system works.

For example, in some countries pirating expensive produce like AutoCad may result in prison time, because cost of the software surpasses thresold after which the act is considered to be a criminal offense instead of administrative one.

They're creating a userbase. People that know their product, has been used them for years, and HAVE to buy them to do their job. It is a very clever move, not sure if it is a moral one.

---

In the end big companies like autodesk are the ones you wouldn't want to be messing with. As far as I can tell, their moral standards are fairly low, and they would probably send snipers after pirates if they could.

Speaking of famous anti-piracy cases, Epic Games (guys that own Unreal engine) once destroyed a game studio (called "Too Human") that pirated their engine. The court ordered the studio to destroy copies of several games they worked on, and the studio filed bankruptcy.

 

^ wow I didn't know that. How EPIC markets themselves you would really think they are the good guys look how today they endup making UE4 free and its only cause of Unity.

I guess Student copies for commercial use are about the same as piracy since people practically stopped pirating Autodesk software once they gave it away free for non commercial use. Instead of bothering with cracks the pirates just use the student version.

 

There are no good guys.

ANY company will do the same. When their interests are infringed, it is "punishment to the maximum extent of the law" time. That's the reason why people should pay attention to license agreements and take them seriously.

 

Speaking of Epic Games back then unreal engine cost several millions of dollars. So, while I'm not exactly sure about destroying unreleased games (that was court's decision), starting a lawsuit in that case was pretty much the only option.

As for the autodesk, they're switching all their products to subscription scheme, so it is a good thing that there are alternatives.

 

Did you read the link? I certainly wouldn't consider them bad guys based on what's written there.

 

When did Autodesk start providing Maya Educational for free? This is fantastic for those trying to get into the industry and just gaining experience using the app. This reminds me of a few years ago, when Microsoft provided Visual Studio Express for free, which had the same restriction of no commercial apps, but now, the Community Edition allows individuals (and/or small teams?) to sell their software products commercially.

 

I assume it's because there are viable low-cost alternatives to all of those things. Even when VS Express was free I couldn't use it commercially, so I generally didn't use it at all. That restriction was just as bad as a price tag. As a result I usually used other software instead until, eventually, I switched to VS because my employer purchased a license for me.

Microsoft didn't lose any money by making the CE available to me for free. They did make me more likely to use it, though (in fact, I'm using it right now), along with loads of other people. And in the long run, that's where they're making money - when employers buy licenses for employees, or when startups get to the point where the CE license doesn't fit any more.

 

You could.

 

Neat. Which version is that from?

I wonder then if my reason for not using it was a lacking feature (...plugins support?) or something.

 

Based on stackoverflow post where it is quoted... at least since 2009. The permission still applies. IIRC it was that way since 2005, but I might be wrong about it.

You couldn't install plugins, and you had to manually setup windows sdk for it, because it didn't include anything by default. I think you could pretty much only make a console app in it out of the box, but I might be wrong about it.

 

subscription kinda like what Adobe did with photoshop cloud?

I wonder if Autodesk would still care if people pirate their old software and use it to build games etc when they go cloud subscription.

 

This smells to me like one of those posts where...

...really means...

 

^ A lot of things tend to smell like something it isn't.

For example cooking a pig or processed corned beef in a tin can often smell like rancid unwashed maybe even rotten vagina. But that does not mean it is.

Also if you bothered to read the post you would see this thread is about what will happen if we bought assets on the unity store for our game which later down the road was revealed to have been created by student licenses or pirated copies.

What would then be the position with your game, where you used assets created by student licenses through no fault of your own. In reckon autodesk would still have legal rights to take down your game. Though I would doubt they would really go that distance over indie games as some people have claimed about half of games on google's android store is likely created by student or pirated software. Companies may just not bother how will you shut down a million games? it would cost you more than its worth. Especially since most of those games are created in 3rd world countries without copyright laws.

 

Hypothetically, I've got a friend...

 

I wasn't trying to be accusatory, necessarily. You'd mentioned in other posts that you'd like to pursue publishing on the Asset Store, so this seemed like a natural progression of that train of thought. I've read enough of your posts to know you seem like a smart kid, which is why I believe you'd properly veil your question and phrase it in a way to not be self-incriminating. If I were trying to ask this question to assuage my own fears of being caught violating a EULA, this is exactly how I'd phrase it is all I was really saying.

In any case, when you upload an item to the Asset Store, you have to check a box agreeing that you own the assets contained within and have the right to publish them. This puts the asset publisher on the hook in the case of legal disputes, and not you, the end user. While I do believe the likelihood of actually getting caught publishing under a student license is almost impossibly small, the chance exists and would be a very bad day for the person found to be in violation.

 

Look, you posted several threads last few days asking this or that question, and overall impression is that you're trying to transition into gamedev, want to make it main source of income, and are probing ground for a possible path to your goal.

This thread - regardless of your real intetion (which I won't know, because I can't exactly read minds over TCP/IP) - gives the same impression.

While it is unlikely that you'll get a visit from autodesk's eradication team, it is always possible to get lucky and suddenly become a scapegoat in another pointless demonstration of "high moral standards" or "power of law" in the war against "evil pirates". Or something. And as I mentioned, in the right circumsntaces pirating expensive software (like autodesks) may result in expensive fine or even a prison time.

So, just use blender or buy a license somehow. Steam has some software available, and some of it is adjusted to match regional price levels. Not sure if your region will get adjusted price, but it is worth checking out.

 

^ yeah I decided on using Blender. Its free and gets the job done, there are enough books and tutorials on using blender now. Back in the days everything was Autodesk but in recent times I think there are more than enough resources for blender to work just fine.

 

I also feel like I have to point out that Trinidad (and the Caribbean as a whole) is famous for its pirates, so you're automatically a suspect on those grounds alone.

 

Because 3 years is enough for people to learn. People working solo aren't AD's target market. AD's target market are studios which do have a ton of seats to buy and upgrade.

The more people skilled in their products, the more money they do make because studios buy more seats for staff. They aren't losing with this strategy (which they've done since the start, basically).

For solo developers, their subscription plans are filling that void, including Maya LT.

 

Well this would be a bad time to mention that almost every computer store in my country has pirated software on display for sale.

Like when someone walks into a store and says they need a copy of windows 8. The sales clerk has to ask if they ever considered trying out an Original copy. lol

Dunno if its the same in EU and NA but here every street corner has pirated movies on sale on Blu Ray and DVD. Original does not exist unless its multi player games that absolutely require genuine license.

And even then people here buy from G2A which are grey market sites selling Russian keys for 80% off the original price. LOL

 

And look what Disney teaches

 

Well, unless it's changed you technically do. It's embedded in the metadata somewhere. I commissioned someone once online to create a 3D model for me. Then sent it to another friend of mine to animate. It was a model created in Maya and when he opened it, he got a prompt that told him the model was created in the Educational version of Maya and was for non-commercial use only. Needless to say, I returned the model and did not pay the original modeler.

Most companies are honest, and companies / industries are their target market. They may pursue Joe Blow from down the block occasionally to protect their IP, but in general, it's not their target and not where they will make their money. Sort of why Pixologic gives free upgrades forever... their money really comes from studios and support contracts.

Besides that, saturating the market with students who are learning new techniques and also far more likely to leverage new features will capture a whole generation who love to make tutorial videos on YouTube. They can show off these new features / techniques and help to persuade companies to leverage the technology. It's low cost advertising by using folks who wouldn't likely purchase licensing anyway when you're really a B2B based company.

 

I agree with everything you said except this. Businesses are businesses, and honesty isn't a quality well-suited to business. If businesses were honest, most food packaging would have "This product is not good for you and will eventually give you cancer" printed on them. Your cable bill would have a "Because you want to watch TV and have few other options" charge listed instead of "Service fee". And Unity Technologies would state outright "Dark UI is for Pro only because it's our product and we'll do what we want with it, thank you."

 

In *.fbx file? Judging by documentaiton, unity requires Maya installation in order for maya files to work. So, uploaded model will be *.fbx, not *.ma/*.mb/whatever.

 

The file I requested and got was the native maya format, whatever that is, because I wanted to have it animated and then exported as an FBX. I like to have originals because it's easy enough to get converted.

As a side note, it may have also been 3DS Max... I don't recall 100%, it was a couple years ago, but it was one of the two.

 

Asset Store guidelines require OBJ or FBX format for included models, so this may be stripped out of published files is what I believe @neginfinity was getting at.

 

I think that's an over-generalization, but I'll restate anyway. Most businesses don't pirate software because they are afraid of being sued. It is a huge risk to their own business to not be properly licensed. Nearly every company I've consulted for has put a big emphasis on understanding and purchases the proper licensing.

 

Oh, this wasn't from the asset store. It was some 3D guy I found through the eenternetz. But yeah I see what you're saying. The educational version could be used to publish different formats I suppose.

 

Yeah what I was asking is if Autodesk can know you pirated their software if they were to simply go on Unity site and purchase a bunch of assets?

Or if Autodesk was to go on apple or google store, buy a game then look through it to see if a pirated version of Maya was used. This seems like an awful lot of trouble and time to waste unless its a big company. But yeah anything is possible

 

It certainly seems likely that they could embed the information into any export with some smart design. I remember when it came out that World of Warcraft had been embedding information in every screenshot for years before anyone figured it out.

 

Both 3dsMax and Maya (along with other tools made by Autodesk Mudbox, MotionBuilder, etc.) embed that information in their files. It's a security procedure, just like the serial number and reg key. I remember piracy was a big problem with 3dsMax 2003. Back then the license was around $3,500 for the professional version. Technically, the price is over where the US considers it grand theft instead of just regular theft.

As for how they can figure it out from Asset Store purchases, generally they don't. The most likely way something like that would happen is if a person wrote to the Autodesk legal department that there is an asset that contains objects that look suspiciously similar to X or Y. I'm not sure how it works on the international side, but in the US, Autodesk can request to see the asset from Unity on grounds of Suspicion of Copyright Infringement. After that, they would compare the models and figure out what's what. They aren't going to do that if someone suspects an asset was made with 3dsMax trial or student version, unless that person had proof.

It's all meaningless though because you are not liable for assets purchased from the store. The developer of the asset has to confirm that the asset is original or has proper permissions before uploading the asset. The developer is liable if there is any copyright infringement, not you.

 

VS Express didn't (and doesn't) have this restriction.

 

Really the are a few pirates around I'm sure and in the asset store but if you're a professional artist making art and you enjoy it why wouldn't you try your hand at selling original work in the asset store? They must be the biggest number by far. Although from the popularity listings I don't think professional quality and most popular art assets always correspond 1-to-1.

 

Didn't read the whole thread. I just wanted to mention that not every educational license of every program is for noncommercial use only. Not sure about how the current status is, but I'm 100% sure that Adobe had educational licenses for at least several years, that were allowed for commercial use. It gets the students used to the tools (and used to paying for them), helps them see the price as an investment in their future income and helps them get their career started.

 

Mostly true. But you could still be required to remove the asset from your game. And depending on your distribution method, that could be a time consuming or expensive exercise. Or even game breaking.

 

This is true, my guess is that Autodesk does not bother with these minor things. Else we would have seen a few cases already. The only lawsuit you ever read about is when these companies go after an entire studio not the actual product that was created using a pirated or student copy.

The most surprising thing was when Autodesk sued some company in China for blatant pirated Autodesk software cad and maya. But this company had like 100 computers it clearly was a big studio worth going after.

My guess is that Autodesk would not waste a second of their time going after a studio with 4 people or a hobbyist especially on in a 3rd world country. Just imagine the bad PR? Autodesk sues a kid or small 4 man indie company in India or Venezuela for making money from pirating 3DS Max? and the defendants say they only did it to buy food, lol hahahah

Does Unity ask to verify your Autodesk license before you are allowed to sell assets on their store?

 

Twist the idea around around. Low wage (insert racist slur) countries stealing American (or whatever nation you are in) jobs using stolen technology. People have far less sympathy then. Buying food is a concern no matter where you live. Especially if you have just lost a job because it's been outsourced to some low wage economy. And it's hard to cry poverty when you can afford a computer.

Sounding suspiciously like you are asking if you can use pirated software to upload to the asset store.

Unity doesn't formally verify most assets. But you do have to sign saying you own the rights to distribute the asset for comercial use. And Unity has the right to ask for proof if they feel they need it. And they can withhold payments if your account is suspected of illegal activity.

There are plenty of legal ways to obtain software you can use commercially at no cost. Try one of those instead.

 

I vaguely remember seeing an ad in a 3D print magazine from more than 10 years ago where autodesk basically offered rewards for people who point out studios that use pirated autodesk software. In my mind autodesk has the most hardcore anti piracy stance of every developer out there. I would not mess with them!

Just learn blender and you have nothing to worry about. I know people with legit 3DS Max licenses who seriously consider switching from Max to blender because the long term cost is just too high if you keep updating perpetual licenses, and afaik they recently went 100% subscription only anyway, but I'm not sure.

I'll see in 5-10 years if I have backed the right horse with blender. I hope to see it find widespread adoption in even AAA gamedev one day, but it remains to be seen if that ever will be the case or if it will remain a niche product in that market.

Imho that would be insane and unprofessional. Just like using pirated software to sell assets.

 

Your guess is incorrect. Actually Autodesk is known to go after individuals. So they will bother with it.

They will do that without a second thought.

This is not some kind of tiny startup that can get destroyed by bad PR. They have 2.5 billions of usd in revenue every year, and 4.5 billions in assets. They will gladly destroy an individual user, because for them it is important to ensure people do not even think about pirating their product.

Keep in mind that those guys own BOTH 3dsmax and maya. They're close to being a monopoly.

It is a good thing that there's blender as alternative, otherwise situation would've been grim.

 

Perpetual licenses are and will be discontinued for their products depending on the suite. Both 3dsmax and maya perpetual licenses were sold up to Jan 31st, 2016. Some of their products still have perpetual licenses up to July 31st, 2016.

http://www.autodesk.com/products/perpetual-licenses

 

It's crazy how "devs insisting they get paid for their product" is considered a grim situation.

 

I definitely agree with your statements focusing on piracy, but he's primarily referring to the problems that would come with no competition. Although that said I wonder how much Blender actually affects the decisions Autodesk makes. I suspect that their products are driven more by the industry than actual competition.

 

Got ya. That actually makes sense. Fortunately economics doesn't work that way. Getting a monopoly on a software product is virtually impossible.

 

It is not about piracy.

The situation would've been grim because they would own most of the 3d market, which would give them an easy way to keep raising prices through the roof. I heard that that's what they actually did after acquiring maya, but I don't know whether it is true or not.
---

Got ninja'd by Riyah.

Well, making alternative for a product like 3dsmax would require large amount of cash, so it is not like competitors can just materialize out of nothing. Someone who has been maintaining a product (while slowly evolving it) for 15 years will hold distinnct advantage, and if they own several of those products, advantage will be bigger.

Either way I think that whoever tries to get started in computer-related industry should have access to free tools that can be used for commercial purpose. That way people won't waste their talent trying to get cash for software. Fortunately, opensource software has most of this covered by now.

 

Yeah, I misread your post. I actually agree with you here.