Shulou(Shulou.com)11/24 Report--

Thanks to CTOnews.com netizen OC_Formula for the clue delivery! CTOnews.com, September 18, Unity engine is being widely criticized by the industry due to the previous dispute over fees. According to foreign media arstechnica, a number of game studios are preparing to sue Unity for "contradictory terms of service."

It is reported that Unity made it clear that "the new fee structure does not apply to any games installed before the newly announced fee structure takes effect on January 1." But in its FAQ, the company said that games released before 2024 would have to be paid for subsequent installations after the new rules came into effect.

Assuming that the game meets the requirements and releases the Unity runtime, then Unity will charge a running fee.

We will check the lifetime installation times of the game to see if it meets the criteria for charging a runtime fee. We will then charge a runtime fee for all new installations after January 1, 2024.

▲ source Unity FAQ in addition to the obvious contradictions in the above terms of service, CEO John Riccitiello of Unity in 2015 publicly touted Unity's "no royalty, no messing around" subscription plan, where users only need to pay a permanent subscription and no more fee.

But now, even developers who paid $1500 for Unity's "permanent license" may theoretically have to pay an additional fee per installation starting next year.

▲ source Unity's CEO John Riccitiello's previous argument, but Untiy cited his own "legal argument" (Unity EULA) to refute outside questions about terms of service:

Our terms of service stipulate that Unity may increase or change the fee at any time. We will notify you more than three months in advance before the Unity Runtime fee takes effect. No consent is required for the extra fee to take effect, and the only version of our terms is the latest version; you cannot choose to comply with the previous version. In addition, our terms are governed by the laws of the state of California and have nothing to do with the country where the customer is located.

Foreign media believe that, in a broad sense, the general legal agreements signed by all Unity developers support this position in theory, according to the legal arguments cited by ▲ graphic source Untiy. At least as early as 2013, Unity EULA included a broad provision that companies "can modify or terminate subscription terms or other software licensed products at any time."

However, the straightforward language of "we can change what we want" became a little complicated in early 2019. At the time, Unity was embroiled in another dispute over a change in the terms of service (ToS), this time involving a new provision that seemed to ban SpatialOS, a cloud-based multiplayer game development kit.

Although Unity eventually resolved the problem with SpatialOS manufacturer Improbable, the development community is concerned that future ToS changes will affect their projects. In order to calm the situation, Unity announced a new "open platform commitment" in its blog, "when you get a version of Unity, but do not upgrade your project, we think you should be able to stick to that version of ToS", that is, "developers follow the EULA of which version of the Unity engine they use."

▲ Touyuan Unity blog on the GitHub page set up by Unity to track such ToS changes, the promise was translated into legal terminology:

Unity may update these Unity Software additional terms at any time for any reason without prior notice (hereinafter referred to as the "Update terms"). The update terms will apply to the latest current year version of Unity Software, but if the update terms adversely affect your rights You may choose to continue to use any current year version of the Unity Software (such as 2018.x and 2018.y and any long-term support (LTS) versions of that year in accordance with the terms previously applicable to the updated terms (hereinafter referred to as the "previous terms").

On the face of it, the historical GitHub page (Web Archive archive) released by ▲ Picture Source Unity shows that games released before the new terms of Unity come into effect can adhere to the old installation-free service policy that existed at the time of game release, and developers need to comply with the new charging policy if they want to update the project to a subsequent version of Unity.

More importantly, the 2019 software terms of use clearly define the right of "non-exclusive, non-transferable, royalty-free", that is, to "release Unity Runtime as an integrated part of the project" under certain broad conditions. Based on this terms of service, Unity does not actually have the right to charge developers who use older engines.

However, Unity completely deleted the above terms of service in its April 2023 update of the terms of service.

The note at the top of the April version mentions that the new version includes an update to the "clause modification" section. In fact, the "update" just deletes "games released before the new provisions of Unity come into effect, and you can adhere to the old installation fee-free service policy that existed when the game was released." in addition, Unity also updated the "royalty-free runtime distribution" provisions, indicating that such distribution "requires to pay applicable fees", which quietly laid the legal foundation for the current Unity installation fee announcement.

Foreign media also believe that Unity seems to be sparing no effort to eliminate at least some of the existing signs that its previous "software terms of service" are "no different" from what they are now, but Web Archive has recorded all the original content.

Richard Hoeg, a game industry lawyer, analyzed the legal issues of Unity and third-party developers on YouTube Live, saying that "in today's contract, Unity's previous contract seems to be covered, but there are problems with 'time' and 'old version', especially for games that have been made and finalized not long ago, long before Unity made fee changes."

Where Unity may encounter some legal risks is the apparent conflict between the overall terms of Service (Unity says that as long as you use its service, you will be bound by it) and the Software terms of Service (until recently, if you do not update the game, you can continue to use the old version).

Richard Hoeg believes that in the actual court, if the developer wants to sue Unity, the relevant argument "may be a difficult technical claim." In this argument, developers can only "put themselves into the concept of justice and hope that everything is good for them".

CTOnews.com found that independent developers such as Xalavier Nelson and game "Cult of the Lamb" developers "some of the most important developers in the field who use the engine" are considering filing a class action lawsuit against Unity.

▲ source Xalavier Nelson posted a post on the X platform, "I don't see that this is legal," Cult of the Lamb developer Massive Monster claimed. "We definitely have a lawsuit to fight."

Referenc

Unity plan pricing and packaging updates

2015 Unity's CEO John Riccitiello publicly touted engine usage policy

Untiy refutes outside "evidence of terms of service"

Unity EULA 2013 (Web Archive Archive)

Unity blog "developers follow the version of EULA which version engine they use"

Historical GitHub page released by Unity (Web Archive archive)

Unity's terms of service update in April 2023

Wait, is Unity allowed to just change its fee structure like that?

Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.