Recent ToS update blocks the use of SpatialOS to make games in Unity

Just making sure!

I appreciate it!! Thank you!!

 

tomorrow will be interesting !

 

Spatial OS presentation in Unite 2016. It seems they weren't violating the TOS in that time.

 

Actually, if you have pro you can disable editor analytics, its been that way for ages.

If you dont have pro, then why are you complaining about data collection? You either pay and remove it, or accept that you are using free software and forego some of those liberties (like every free software package does these days)

 

They didn't had enough minerals money.

 

The new terms are live:

https://unity3d.com/legal/terms-of-service/software

By my initial skim, it looks promising.

There seems to be no restrictions on using third party services. Just restrictions on how they can use the Unity name/logo etc.

They have added a clause on modifications to the ToS - that the terms change won't apply to prior versions of Unity.

I'm still digesting and reading, but this seems very promising.

 

So, given that, if Spatial stops using the Unity logo or making it sound like they are endorsed by Unity, will they get their licenses back so they can continue to fix their service for all their Unity customers?

That'd be my question. I don't have time to actually ask it in the AMA later, and I'm hoping someone else will.

 

New ToS are up. 2.4 is now crystal clear and very much supports developer flexibility and choice.

It looks likes section 2.6 has been written by a software legalese ninja and covers their intent to protect their IP but nothing sinister I can see there. A strong and good gesture from UT to clear up this mess.

Good work.

 

Hey everyone,

We've updated our terms of service. Please read the latest blog post by Unity CTO and Co-founder Joachim for an overview of today's update. If you have any questions we're inviting you to join our AMA on r/Unity3d today at 10 am PST.

 

https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/1...ice-and-commitment-to-being-an-open-platform/

 

Yeah, I'm wondering about the same.

Which makes some sense, and doesn't at the same time.

Edit: Thanks!

 

Per the blog post above, they already have their licenses back.

So far I'm very happy.

I'm sorry to Joachim for all the problems all this undoubtedly caused, but I think this debate has been for the better for everyone.

I'm still not entirely clear on whether user-created-content focused games might fit into these terms - if such games are allowed, or could blur into a competitive space with Unity - but I feel it's a separate question at this stage.

 

I'm glad someone finally created an explanation using medium-language about what is going on here so beginner to intermediate level Unity users can know what the heck SpatialOS/Improbable is and what it does, and what the issue Unity partakes with it. Trying to figure this out by reading this thread and ToS was giving me headaches.
Mainly, I couldn't figure out what Unity meant by "Unity Runtime".

There's something I still can't figure out: Why their EDITOR licenses were revoked.
What does using the Unity EDITOR have to do with running "Unity Runtimes" on a cloud?
Were they actually running the Unity editor on the cloud too?

 

The latest blog post shows that all of this was blown out of proportion.

Everyone here should go read it, and remember this indicent the next time a third party start up makes up things about a company that a lot of you have supported and been affiliated with for a long time.

EDIT: and it even allows spatial to operate again. Im hoping this makes all the types with daggers for unity disappear again but I doubt it, if this has shown me one thing its that people are dying for a reason to slate big companies even if it doesnt really impact them directly (nor ever will).

 

TL;DR from the blog:
Welp, money ransom tactics haven't worked out this time. So we've reverted everything back.

Maybe next time.

Meanwhile enjoy our cloud services.

Spoiler

Is a joke, plz no bannerino. I liek Unity.

 

I disagree that this was blown out of proportion. The massive change to the ToS and reinstatement of Improbables licenses (because the new ToS removes their violations!!) shows that the community was right to get up in arms about this. Unity then reacted to this and fixed their ToS and reinstated the licenses.

 

Thank you Unity for your change in TOS, specifically for making sure that users can continue working according to whatever terms they agreed to when they downloaded your product, and are not forced to sign an updated version unless they want to update that product.

This means that whatever else happens I can always finish my project with at least the same tools I started with.

The conclusion to this saga has strengthened my belief in the Unity team and their sincere willingness to listen and support their users, even when it's not directly in their best business interest (though I do obviously understand that Unity is a commercial company with profit related goals as well).

 

This wasnt blown out of proportion at all.. The terms of service had the majority of networked games developed with Unity in breach...

This was a strong message from UT, and a generous reinstatement of the spatial license. Plus they removed the retroactive ToS clause.

Very strong message and comitment to the community. This was needed.

 

Very, very happy with this. I didn't expect to see a no-retroactive-eula bit in there so this is fantastic.

Agreed. It was the community response that prompted this change. Many thanks to everyone at Unity listening and being open!

 

They're just trying to minimize the negative impact of Improbable/Epic's FUD campaign.

 

The "editor license" is the Unity license. Players don't need a license to play games built with Unity for example; developers just need one to create it.

 

A good example of how the business loves to change shoes when heels start to burn. Another ToS change is another example. Commercial hypocrisy.

 

The r/Unity3D AMA is now open for your questions. John and Joachim will be answering as much as they can between 10 - 11 am PST.

 

You're essentially saying that it's okay to bully a business into submission by the masses fired up by the concurrency. Well, we have different world-view upon what considered good and not.

 

Sorry Ninja, if you had examined the ToS from a legal standpoint it placed the majority of Unity developers in breach, period, end of story. This wasn't an outcry of the masses bullying Unity it was an outcry of the masses based on Unity's track record of opportunistically changing the playing field whenever they want to enable a new revenue stream which put indie developers at risk.

Disagree all you like, that is your opinion and prerogative. I don't buy your "poor unity is a martyr to us mean game devs". This was a cash play by Unity and they have been called on it and responded very well.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty happy with the outcome. We got clearer ToS and version-controlled, which even more than I have counted on. It's good thing. I don't know what you're talking about when you say track-record of putting out of businesses with ToS. Can you give me examples when Unity did that?
So what I'm saying is I wouldn't celebrate this as a "customers achieve something"-milestone. If this whole stuff would have been fueled by developers, of course, but it was fueled by a concurrent business (similarly in the billions in assets) and a third-party also concurrent business, with even more assets.
Essentially my view of the situation is: a similar fish and a bigger fish bullied a fish into submission.

 

I think it's a bit unfair to claim a track record of such things. Like any company, Unity has made mistakes in the past, but this response is exactly what I'd hope for from a company that is listening to its community.

On the other hand, I also disagree that it's "bullying" - a large part of the developer community had legitimate concerns and was vocal about them. Largely in a civil way, but also with a sizeable minority of knee-jerk flamers unfortunately. I would hope that Unity made this decision with the reasonable people in mind, not those throwing insults.

EDIT: Clearly, Epic also had an effect on this (although by the looks of it now, it might have been a bit of a PR mis-step on their part too). But that's kinda how competition works. In a cynical sense, if Unity wasn't willing to listen to its users, the way to get any company to listen is ultimately to threaten its bottom line.

 

If "expressing concerns about a horrible ToS clause" is "bullying", then sure. Plenty of people even said they'd take their ball and go play in another park unless things were fixed. I don't think that's bullying either. It's a simple fact that they couldn't run their businesses under those terms.

On the other hand, "Pay us or we'll shut down your third-party service" does feel like bullying to me, and that's what happened to Improbable. Unity wisely backed off that path and gave Improbable their licenses back while also promising the community that such a thing wouldn't happen again. (Via the updated ToS.)

The community shouldn't have had to say anything because this should never have happened in the first place. But the community did band together and insist that something be done to fix this situation. I'm proud of them for that. There was a lot more level-headed criticism than I expected.

 

Everything Unity has done in the past few years gives indies more for free. The only thing those greedy corporate stooges have not given us for free is dark theme

 

The new ToS is a huge improvement. I mostly expected that they'd fix the hosted server issue, but the non-retroactivity change was an excellent surprise. Feeling 200% more confident in Unity now.

I find it amusing that the blog kind of implied - "You can use SpatialOS, but they still suck."

 

Thank you Unity Team, this is good for developers and we shall love you for it.

 

I feel Unity made a great decission here and from what i can tell they now have a better tos than Unreal ..

Also to all that have that defended unity on this , im glad you were the minority... Otherwise nothing would have changed!

 

Best 1000th post on this thread. It couldn't be better.

 

Really happy with the new ToS! What a great conclusion to this mess.

 

In AMA John Riccitiello has said they feeled that Spatial OS was violating terms and asked twice to Spatial OS to state they are actually not in violation. Some people was so sure that they were breaching TOS and must be punished severely for stealing from Unity. But UT was not so sure, hence they did not pursue it in the court.
I would say "asking for confirmation of not violation" is against "presumption of innocence" principle, but I am not a lawyer, so I close my mouth. Anyway, I am glad they changed the TOS and reinstated Spatial licenses, it was the right decision for both users and UT.

 

So, with that out the way, back to coding.

 

Cool, cool. Now let's see if they (Improbable) have the balls to apologize for causing unnecessary trouble in the beginning for some devs.

 

Unity you guys are awesome!!!

TOS makes sense, and makes everything clear

Thank you guys at UT!! You guys are awesome!!!

 

Hope those 1-2 games made with SpatialOS can be brought back up and selling again.

 

You need to view it from a legal perspective. The phrase "asking for confirmation of not violation" is basically a fancy way of saying "we don't have access to the documents that we need to verify therefore we ask that you verify for us". From a legal perspective if the company refuses the only alternative available to see the document is to go to court.

 

They shouldn't have been down for a moment.

Let's leave this at that. It's not necessary to escalate it further. At least not here, on the Unity forums.

 

This. Only two companies felt the need to bring their games down. Everyone else just kept chugging along.

 

Big thanks to the Unity group for revising tos to be more in line with community needs and committing to more open use of their platform.

 

I wish you would've said that waaay earlier. We could've saved the last 19 sites of this thread. Now it's just electro waste.

Anyway, back to making games.

 

Yeah guys, we have games to make, people to please.

Let’s give it our best back in and out of unity (in our games and in our dev areas, asset store, forum, Discord)!!

You guys are awesome!!

Nothing to see here

 

LOL, I have read through the AMA. The dark UI came up, I'm surprised no one mentioned they want the old prefab system back.

 

I have yet to update to 2018 .3 is there an issue with the nested prefabs system?

 

Very impressed with Unity today, amazing that they actually reflected on everything and re-worded the ToS to reflect the values of the community.

My last post in this thread was rather harsh, I'll admit I didn't quite understand the entire situation. Very glad to get a good amount of clarification on what actually transpired and how this whole ordeal came to be, and the steps Unity are taking to prevent this in the future while at the same time staying open to the developers.

Much appreciated guys, faith in you is restored.