Micro-transactions and the Unity Asset Store - any conflicts?

Been working through a couple of monetization methods and ideas for what I've been working on, and I came across a thought that gave me pause. Namely, trying to understand the relationship between offering things like models or skins as micro-transactions, and the potential legal restrictions of the asset store. Specifically in the asset store terms:

3.5

Unless you have been specifically permitted to do so in a separate agreement with Unity and except as permitted under the Unity-EULA, you agree that you will not reproduce, duplicate, copy, sell, trade or resell any Asset that you have licensed from the Unity Asset Store for any purpose.


My question is, with regards to things like micro-transactions, would any of the following scenarios count as 'reselling' an asset.

1. I create a free game, and offer the ability to purchase customization options for your character, such as custom hairstyles or clothing. I've obtained the hairstyles/clothes from the asset store, and I alter them to fit your custom characters.
2. I include a custom housing tool. I let players buy props and furniture to place in their house from an in-game market - those props and furniture are models purchased from the asset store, and have been incorporated into the house-building tool, but are otherwise unaltered.
3. I create a map-building mode that lets players create custom game maps for a strategy game. I have biome packs available on my in-game market, such as a 'desert biome pack', which gives the player access to a number of desert-themed props and textures that they can use to build their custom maps. I have obtained some or all of these textures or models from the asset store.

None of these scenarios offer the raw content from the asset store for players to download, and the players can only use the assets within the confines and rule-sets of the game itself. Regardless of the feasibility of these ideas, do they cross any legal boundaries?

I would imagine that, in all three scenarios, if the offerings were free, there would be no issues (it wouldn't count as redistributing the assets) - so offering them as part of microtransactions should be fine as well (it shouldn't count as reselling the assets). Other thoughts? Or directions towards someone who could give a definitive answer?

 

*not a lawyer, not legal advise, blah blah blah.*

I think it's perfectly fine (legaly, that is) to offer a model (for example) from the asset store as a paid unlockable (IAP) to the game, as long as you don't sell the asset for use other then in the game.

I think "modifications" as stretching the model to fit a character (hair or hats for example) are allowed, it seems to be referring to changing the asset a little and calling it your, re-selling it as your own on the asset store or any marketplace like it.

again, not a lawyer.

 

Also it's very important to not to sell it as-is. You need to adapt it to your game and only allow people to download in Unity's file-format (especially good to use AssetBundles for it).

Also not a lawyer, please show the EULA to a lawyer who can give you proper advice.

 

Unity set the record straight in this thread.

 

Excellent - this was my initial interpretation, but it is nice to have concrete confirmation. Thank you so much for the link!