If i use an asset, should i include the asset's third party notice in the credits of the game?

Hi, i would like to use an asset from the asset store in a game, and it's under eula and mit license. and the asset has a third party notice inside lists a large number of third party assets it used and their licenses (some are mit or sil license, and according to my understanding, these kind of licenses require users to credit them).
and i was wondering if i use that asset in game, should i credit not only the asset i use but also all the third party notice licenses the asset includes? or i only need to credit the asset i use?

Not sure if i ask my question clearly, for English is not my native language and i'm not quite good at it. Thanks for your help in advance.

 

WTF?? This should not happen with the Asset Store No sub licensed assets should be allowed.

 

I guess it is just an asset in Asset Store cannot use other assets in Asset Store, but it can use assets from other places under other licenses? For example, the asset I saw used assets under MIT or SIL or CC0 1.0 license, and none of them is under EULA license (which means they are not from Asset Store?), I guess that is allowed?

 

What makes it bogus IMHO is that the assets should be able to be integrated without license attribution if paid for.

 

It's a free asset under both the EULA and MIT license, so I don't have to literally pay for it, and as far as I see, the third party assets it includes are all don't need to literally pay for, their licenses only requires credit. I don't know if it makes any difference? Or maybe I misunderstand? I mean, after importing the asset, I saw a file names "ThirdPartyNotices", it lists some licenses with a description "the following components are governed by the licenses indicated below", I guess it means it uses the assets it lists in that file under the license it indicated, and I don't know if I use the asset, should I credit these third party licenses in game, but maybe I misunderstand the file, or maybe I shouldn't call what are listed in the file "assets" which would probably cause misunderstanding? (sorry i'm not good at English, and i'm still not sure if i expressed my words clearly and exactly, and sorry if i caused any misunderstanding)

 

Generally, if a license notice affects the person who created the asset you're using, I'd expect it to affect you as well.

However, that is something that will be specified in the license itself, so there may be exceptions. Its up to you to identify them, by checking the license.

SIL font license, for example, doesn't seem to require it if the font is included as an intrinsic part of a 'document', only if its distributed as a font (as below) A Unity game is arguably a document in that context.

 

Just a wild guess: I wonder if the "require credit" part is for the creator of the Asset and not the final user (you)? They aren't allowed to say "I made this", they need to give credit for the sub-parts. But in a game you might not list everything you bought or contracted. So you're not unfairly giving all of the credit to the wrong person. For that matter, even if you do list only the Asset store provider, anyone looking will see the sub-attributions on their page. Again, just a guess.

 

You'll have to read the license itself to find out. Most licenses aside from the big ones will, at most, ask you to ship a text file with the project.

 

Thank you. And I was wondering now as it is arguable, is it better for me to just credit the font? Will there be any harm if I credit something which I don't need to credit?

 

It's my wild guess as well. How I wish it were true, but seems it isn't.

 

Thank you. It's very helpful. And I have one more question, for example, if I use a character from Asset Store, and the character asset includes a demo scene inside, the demo scene use a skybox which is listed in the ThirdPartyNotices file, then if I just use the character in game and I don't use the skybox, do I need to credit the skybox as well because the asset I use credits it?
btw, in the extreme example you mentioned, does "ship" means I should email the licensor my game, or does it means I should make a physical copy of my game and print the credit file and put them in a package and send the package to the licensor?

 

A game is like a movie, right? Movie credits go in front of the film (or at the end in America). Game credits go in the little button that says "show credits". Unity has many, many pages of credits which most people may not have noticed. I mean, really, once you have scrolling credits, pasting a few hundred lines of required sub-part credits, just to be safe, seems hardly any work.

 

Safe from what? What if the license requires you not mention the asset? Unity used to have a bunch of rules for how you would use their “word mark”, the safe option here would be to never mention Unity anywhere.

 

I think its the safest options, yes.

And no, there's no harm in giving credit. I dont think Ive ever seen a license which demands credit not be given, but even where people don't specifically ask for it, it just seems 'fairer' to give that credit, IMO.

 

There's no need to credit assets you dont use.

 

Whilst this is entirely possible, Ive never ever seen such a license, it seems such an unlikely hypothetical as to not 'worry' about. But if that's in the license, then that's what one would do, obviously.

I'd be really surprised if the wording of what was basically protection against 'passing off' would construe a refusal to allow Unity to be credited forbeing the engine of, or providing components for, a built game. Evidence being the obligatory Unity logo on the Free version splashscreen.

 

k

 

Oh there are plenty.
I have seen quite few and I use often one or two, with such licence.

It is a bit weird thing with "must" including licences in the projects, however, as it may be required. Unless you publish as part of open source, for which many licences won't allow it, the licence file typically won't be included in build anyway. So at best, licence of the asset is as reference for a developer.
May also help preventing, from unwanted project sharing.

My point of view...

Did you missed some key strokes in your post?

 

No.

 

Got an example? Im genuinely curious now.

 

One of them was
https://assetstore.unity.com/packages/tools/gui/embedded-browser-55459#description
If I remember correctly few years back, licence stated, that it should not be endorsed in the products. And this very stuck in my mind.

But I can not see this statement anymore.
Maybe it has been changed, since I have this asset past few years and I also updated it.

 

Cheers!

 

You agreed to the standard Unity Asset Store license, which has no requirement for 3rd party notices. If there wasn't any other licensing mentioned on the Asset Store page when you purchased the asset, then you didn't agree to any other terms, regardless if you found them later in a text file with the asset.

But if you want to ensure the off chance that the original creator doesn't come after you directly for any reason, I'd just comply with whatever license terms you found, assuming doing so isn't too difficult.

 

Thanks for all your help, you really help me a lot.
Here's my understanding now: I should check all the assets' third party notices, read each of the licenses' requirements, if a license requires credit, then credit it,
if a license is arguable about credit, but it doesn't forbid crediting, then credit it for safe,
if a license forbid crediting, then don't mention it.
Is that the best way to do with the licenses?

 

I' d say so, yes.

 

Thank you.