Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Big News: Unity preventing SpatialOS from working on their platform

Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 16,947
edited January 2019 in The Pub at MMORPG.COM
https://improbable.io/company/news/2019/01/10/unity-blocks-spatialos

  • Unity’s block of SpatialOS: The game engine provider Unity recently changed (Dec 5) and then clarified directly to us (9 Jan) their terms of service to specifically disallow services like Improbable’s to function with their engine. This was previously freely possible in their terms, as with other major engines.
  • What this means: Unity has clarified to us that this change effectively makes it a breach of terms to operate or create SpatialOS games using Unity, including in development and production games.

All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

"I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

"Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

MadFrenchiePhry[Deleted User]
«1

Comments

  • GolelornGolelorn Member RarePosts: 1,395
    Specifically clause 2.4 which is in regards to Streaming and Cloud gaming.

    I think this is a really bold move by Unity. It appears they are trying to lock people into using their services, which in the future could mean they are well within their rights to ban sales from Steam and you can only use their fancy, new site(speculation as this obviously does not exist right now).

  • HeretiqueHeretique Member RarePosts: 1,534
    Basically "the money isn't funneling to me" situation. I -think- it's a bad move from Unity but granted I don't have the numbers/foresight in the business to see if this was factually bad/good.
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 16,947
    edited January 2019
    Heretique said:
    Basically "the money isn't funneling to me" situation. I -think- it's a bad move from Unity but granted I don't have the numbers/foresight in the business to see if this was factually bad/good.
    I think the vulnerability to Unity is that these MMOs using SpatialOS are also their own customers and if Unity is causing their own customers pain it's going to make future potential ones think twice about using them.


    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • MaxBaconMaxBacon Member LegendaryPosts: 7,765
    That time Dual Universe dodged the biggest bullet by not using Unity. lol
    Phry
  • MendelMendel Member LegendaryPosts: 5,609
    It looks like another case of the gaming industry eating it's own offspring.

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • anemoanemo Member RarePosts: 1,903
    Unity' s plan isn't to affect Worlds Adrift:  https://www.worldsadrift.com/blog/update/

    So players should be even less affected than normal developers.   As long as the two engine developers stay sane.

    Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.

    "At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."

  • immoralthangimmoralthang Member RarePosts: 300
    edited January 2019
    So you’re telling me Unity caused division?? ha!
    [Deleted User][Deleted User]HermodH0urg1assScotAlBQuirkyVermillion_Raventhalbartoni33
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    edited January 2019
    Feel like I'd need to read a lot more on this subject before having an opinion, as apparently this was caused by an issue of Improbable being in breach of terms of service for around a year?

    https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2019-01-10-unity-explains-improbable-license-revocation-calls-spatialos-creators-post-incorrect

    https://blogs.unity3d.com/2019/01/10/our-response-to-improbables-blog-post-and-why-you-can-keep-working-on-your-spatialos-game/

    Seems in-development and production games are both safe, it's just new projects that are not approved for use of SpatialOS. You can still use other third party servers and platforms. In the case of servers it's pretty open, in the case of a full platform, they need to be a "Unity approved partner" and abide the Unity EULA.

    Which Unity claims Improbable was in breach of, which is what prompted Unity to remove them from being a Unity approved partner after attempts to resolve the issue failed.

    We really need to not spin out conspiratorial rhetoric before knowing the full scope of a situation.
    YashaX
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    edited January 2019
    Limnic said:
    Seems in-development and production games are both safe, it's just new projects that are not approved for use of SpatialOS.
    ...if you consider using unsupported vital middleware in your engine safe, I guess you could say that but I think for most developers it is way more serious issue.
    anemo
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    Gdemami said:
    Limnic said:
    Seems in-development and production games are both safe, it's just new projects that are not approved for use of SpatialOS.
    ...if you consider using unsupported vital middleware in your engine safe, I guess you could say that but I think for most developers it is way more serious issue.
    You're using "safe" in a different context than I am.

    "Safe" In my context meant Unity is not killing anyone's current projects just because of Improbable losing their approval. People can still continue development and published titles are not affected.

    You just used "safe" to talk about middleware security, which is an entirely different issue than the subject of the thread in the first place.

    Yes, using "unsupported" middleware is unsafe. SpatialOS is supported by Improbable though. They are just not a Unity approved partner any more. I would still raise questions regarding the fact that they apparently broke the EULA for unity, and that's why this all happened. So that could be a red flag, though one would need to know what part of the EULA they broke.

    You seem to be mixing up the notion of support and approval.
    Gdemami
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    edited January 2019
    Limnic said:
    You're using "safe" in a different context than I am.
    No, I am not.

    I am using it in the same context as you are and pointing out, despite they can use SpatialOS legaly, they are far from unaffected - lack of support and further development/fixes on SpatialOS integration is a big deal.
  • MendelMendel Member LegendaryPosts: 5,609
    Torval said:
    Oh man, things are going to get ugly with the money faucet drying up.

    It's all over the rest of the tech world too. One of the latest examples is MongoDB being in a spat with Amazon. Less of a spat and more pissed off, but words are flying. It's gets stupid and political, but it's all about money and control. Sound familiar?

    I wonder if Unity will go after developers like Artcraft with the networking API they want to sell. PC gaming continues its journey rocketing down shit show avenue.

    Maybe studios need to go back to developing their own in house engines. I'm not even sure that's viable anymore though.
    The Unity-SpatialOS relationship reminds me a lot of Oracle and various middleware providers in the 80s and 90s.  Oracle grew, despite the lawsuits, claims, rumors and other dirty tricks (on both sides).  The more things change, the more they remain the same.



    Gdemami[Deleted User]

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    Gdemami said:
    Limnic said:
    You're using "safe" in a different context than I am.
    No, I am not.

    I am using it in the same context as you are and pointing out, despite they can use SpatialOS legaly, they are far from unaffected - lack of support and further development/fixes on SpatialOS integration is a big deal.
    That's is entirely dependent on Improbable's decisions and behavior going forward and if they choose to drop SpatialOS. If you claim you are using it in the same context, then you also need to acknowledge that your statement is based on an opinion that assumes a single course of action going into the future, and no other potential courses of action (such as this current shebang not going over as well as they want and them backpedaling to make amends with Unity and work with the EULA) taking place.

    So let's not claim an absolute out of an assumption.
    Gdemami
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    edited July 2019
    [mod edit]
    I worked on a new game with Unity for approximately 2 years. It was actually a multiplayer mode game which was using AWS hosting and I was really concerned then. But eventually, it ended my project completely, as I had to transfer it to another engine and that was a messy thing to do.
    Amazon Web Services supposed to be in relation to this how?

    Oh, it's not.

    I just noticed you inserted a "buy research paper" link in there, so I am questioning the nature of your existence and comment. Just isolated it to note, burying ad links in comments ain't exactly standard.
    Post edited by Vaross on
    GdemamiPhrygervaise1
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342
    edited July 2019
    Limnic said:
    Amazon Web Services supposed to be in relation to this how?

    ...unity licencing.
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    edited July 2019
    Gdemami said:
    Limnic said:
    Amazon Web Services supposed to be in relation to this how?

    ...unity licencing.
    Unity does not prevent that, AWS is a supported platform. The only immediate issue is that AWS has not kept in sync with Unity's .NET updates. 
    Gdemami
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    edited July 2019
    Torval said:
    Limnic said:
    Gdemami said:
    Limnic said:
    Amazon Web Services supposed to be in relation to this how?

    ...unity licencing.
    Unity does not prevent that, AWS is a supported platform. The only immediate issue is that AWS has not kept in sync with Unity's .NET updates. 
    The licensing has to do with distribution. It was an issue at the time. That was the crux of the dispute between Spatial and Unity which they worked out. Software licensing hangups are 99% of the time around distribution rights.
    Again, Unity does not prevent that with AWS as a Unity Supported Platform, the issue with distribution comes up around how Spatial was violating that part of their terms. I already gave links regarding this.\

    Amazing how something thought resolved can crop up again because of a random bot trying to sell junk.
    Gdemami
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,435
    Limnic said:
    I worked on a new game with Unity for approximately 2 years. It was actually a multiplayer mode game which was using AWS hosting and I was really concerned then. But eventually, it ended my project completely, as I had to transfer it to another engine and that was a messy thing to do.
    Amazon Web Services supposed to be in relation to this how?

    Oh, it's not.

    I just noticed you inserted a "buy research paper" link in there, so I am questioning the nature of your existence and comment. Just isolated it to note, burying ad links in comments ain't exactly standard.
    Funny thing, I don't see that link in the OP,  not sure why when it shows up fine in your quoted reply....unless... you are the one who added it.  :# 

    Kidding, probably some weird issue with my phone browser.

    I've flagged the original.

    gervaise1

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    Kyleran said:
    Limnic said:
    I worked on a new game with Unity for approximately 2 years. It was actually a multiplayer mode game which was using AWS hosting and I was really concerned then. But eventually, it ended my project completely, as I had to transfer it to another engine and that was a messy thing to do.
    Amazon Web Services supposed to be in relation to this how?

    Oh, it's not.

    I just noticed you inserted a "buy research paper" link in there, so I am questioning the nature of your existence and comment. Just isolated it to note, burying ad links in comments ain't exactly standard.
    Funny thing, I don't see that link in the OP,  not sure why when it shows up fine in your quoted reply....unless... you are the one who added it.  :# 

    Kidding, probably some weird issue with my phone browser.

    I've flagged the original.

    Its stuck at the end of my first link on their post.
    gervaise1
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    That was the biggest issue, Spatial had been repackaging a component of the Unity engine in their product, which is where they breached terms of service and lost their status as a supported partner.

    I'll have to see what the current state of that is if Unity is ok with them now.
    Gdemami
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    Torval said:
    Limnic said:
    Torval said:
    Limnic said:
    Gdemami said:
    Limnic said:
    Amazon Web Services supposed to be in relation to this how?

    ...unity licencing.
    Unity does not prevent that, AWS is a supported platform. The only immediate issue is that AWS has not kept in sync with Unity's .NET updates. 
    The licensing has to do with distribution. It was an issue at the time. That was the crux of the dispute between Spatial and Unity which they worked out. Software licensing hangups are 99% of the time around distribution rights.
    Again, Unity does not prevent that with AWS as a Unity Supported Platform, the issue with distribution comes up around how Spatial was violating that part of their terms. I already gave links regarding this.\

    Amazing how something thought resolved can crop up again because of a random bot trying to sell junk.
    When this was an issue it was a sticking. Like I said it's been clarified and resolved. Just having AWS as a partner platform doesn't mean anything if the licensee doesn't have rights to distribute the pieces even if the distribution platform is greenlit. This issue is old and has been sorted out more or less.
    Being a supported platform was part of the license terms. License doesn't have rights to resell something they did not produce/own, and that was a problem for Spatial, but yet again is not a problem with AWS.
    Gdemami
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    Torval said:
    Limnic said:
    Torval said:
    Limnic said:
    Torval said:
    Limnic said:
    Gdemami said:
    Limnic said:
    Amazon Web Services supposed to be in relation to this how?

    ...unity licencing.
    Unity does not prevent that, AWS is a supported platform. The only immediate issue is that AWS has not kept in sync with Unity's .NET updates. 
    The licensing has to do with distribution. It was an issue at the time. That was the crux of the dispute between Spatial and Unity which they worked out. Software licensing hangups are 99% of the time around distribution rights.
    Again, Unity does not prevent that with AWS as a Unity Supported Platform, the issue with distribution comes up around how Spatial was violating that part of their terms. I already gave links regarding this.\

    Amazing how something thought resolved can crop up again because of a random bot trying to sell junk.
    When this was an issue it was a sticking. Like I said it's been clarified and resolved. Just having AWS as a partner platform doesn't mean anything if the licensee doesn't have rights to distribute the pieces even if the distribution platform is greenlit. This issue is old and has been sorted out more or less.
    Being a supported platform was part of the license terms. License doesn't have rights to resell something they did not produce/own, and that was a problem for Spatial, but yet again is not a problem with AWS.
    You don't work with software licenses and redistribution do you because what you said makes no sense and doesn't mean anything. It's not even untrue, it's just nonsensical.
    Seems more so you are unfamiliar with the situation you are arguing about.

    Spatial breached terms of the original eula by repackaging parts of Unity's network layer in it's product. They did not have a legal license to resell Unity or any of Unity's assets, and were in breach of terms for doing so.

    This extended to them losing Unity Supported Platform status, and thus also falling out of Unity's amended terms for a third party platform. Unity has since stepped back and allowed projects to use any platform regardless of supported platform status, but that didn't address the other side of the issue.

    Which, if you dont understand the relationship between license to resell a product, and reselling assets without such, that speaks to your unfamiliarity with the subject.
    Gdemami
  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    edited July 2019
    Really, in what world do you work where selling someone else's product for profit without legal permission is ok?

    By all means, I'm waiting for your answer, because It will have to be gloriously insane for you to try and justify the idea that resellers are not legally bound through license or contract and that anyone can just package up Unity in part or in whole and sell it, when the reality is licenses and permits are industry standard and only approved vendors can resell Unity as a product or asset.

    Putting code that was produced by Unity and is a part of the unity engine into your own product and selling it, without the proper license from Unity to do so, is illegal and a breach of their EULA. 

    If you don't know the subject, don't attack someone else regarding it.
    Post edited by Limnic on
    KyleranGdemami
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,435
    Limnic said:
    Really, in what world do you work where selling someone else's product for profit without legal permission is ok?
    Perhaps the game gold selling trade? 

    ;)
    Limnic

    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • LimnicLimnic Member RarePosts: 1,116
    edited July 2019
    Torval said:
    Limnic said:
    Really, in what world do you work where selling someone else's product for profit without legal permission is ok?

    By all means, I'm waiting for your answer, because It will have to be gloriously insane for you to try and justify the idea that resellers are not legally bound through license or contract and that anyone can just package up Unity in part or in whole and sell it, when the reality is licenses and permits are industry standard and only approved vendors can resell Unity as a product or asset.

    Putting code that was produced by Unity and is a part of the unity engine into your own product and selling it, without the proper license from Unity to do so, is illegal and a breach of their EULA. 

    If you don't know the subject, don't attack someone else regarding it.
    Now...
    Feel free to answer the question instead of defining the fallacy you are committing. You are the one to say licenses do not relate to distribution rights for a product even though for Unity it's in their End User License Agreement for licensing and use of their product.

    It's ironic you would use the evocation of a red herring as a red herring. Seeing that, again, you were the one that evoked this semantics in your response to my comment, singling out a topic from it that didn't even address the main point made by it. 

    So good on you for showing how you committed multiple fallacies, bad show though in you trying to project your errors.

    You didn't even wait until we were off this page before you tried lying about this.

    Should we go over it since it's right above these comments? Let's see, first you tried to say this;

    "Just having AWS as a partner platform doesn't mean anything if the licensee doesn't have rights to distribute the pieces even if the distribution platform is greenlit."
    Read more at https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/478624/big-news-unity-preventing-spatialos-from-working-on-their-platform/p2#L0jeuHqEyO8Xs7bD.99

    Which failed to acknowledge the point made by me prior;

    "That was the biggest issue, Spatial had been repackaging a component of the Unity engine in their product, which is where they breached terms of service and lost their status as a supported partner."
    Read more at https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/478624/big-news-unity-preventing-spatialos-from-working-on-their-platform/p2#L0jeuHqEyO8Xs7bD.99

    AWS does not distribute any pieces of Unity's engine for it's platform solutions, Spatial did, which again sets them apart and was the reason Spatial lost it's license, because it was in breach of the End User License Agreement.

    And what did you say to that? You attacked the notion of the licensing and redistribution rights;

    "You don't work with software licenses and redistribution do you because what you said makes no sense and doesn't mean anything. It's not even untrue, it's just nonsensical."
    Read more at https://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/478624/big-news-unity-preventing-spatialos-from-working-on-their-platform/p2#L0jeuHqEyO8Xs7bD.99

    Which, what other way is there to take it at that point? You saying Unity's EULA for their license not allowing redistribution/resale of components of their product, is "nonsensical" is just that, you saying that resale licensing is "not even untrue, it's just nonsensical".

    Yet that is the legal standard.

    And here you are now, having been the one to push the conversation onto that tangent, now calling it's evocation as a red herring. Maybe next time you shouldn't make such a nonsensical post then.
    Gdemami
Sign In or Register to comment.