Thought about licenses...
by Teromous · in General Discussion · 02/18/2005 (6:59 pm) · 1 replies
I was sitting at my desk reading over some legal junk and sifting through some license information, when I started thinking about how companies continue to tack on more price tags for the use of their product. These are topped with logo requirements, watermarks, credits, and use restrictions. Is there ever a license that works the other way? Perhaps something that helps, instead of hinders?
Maybe someday there will be some kind of "Indie Core Agreement" where you are only required to pay royalties or obtain a higher license when your earnings are greater than the sum of your total spending. Perhaps two companies will agree that if a person purchased a product from Company "A" for $1,000 they would not be required to pay royalties on a resource developed by Company "B" until their net income exceeded $1,000.
In addition, some products have a logo or credit agreement, and by purchasing a more expensive version you can "buy your way out" of that agreement. Maybe it could work inversely, where a company could offer to pay a set amount to advertise the product used in your game. After all, a resource by itself isn't a game. Neither is a engine.
Just a pipe dream, and the term "royalty free" seems to pique enough interest of most people to keep it as the standard. That works well enough until they take the time to read the fine print.
I know that Torque's commercial license is only required for people who make enough to bank a quarter of a million dollars, but I'm sure people will understand that this thread isn't focused on Torque.
Maybe someday there will be some kind of "Indie Core Agreement" where you are only required to pay royalties or obtain a higher license when your earnings are greater than the sum of your total spending. Perhaps two companies will agree that if a person purchased a product from Company "A" for $1,000 they would not be required to pay royalties on a resource developed by Company "B" until their net income exceeded $1,000.
In addition, some products have a logo or credit agreement, and by purchasing a more expensive version you can "buy your way out" of that agreement. Maybe it could work inversely, where a company could offer to pay a set amount to advertise the product used in your game. After all, a resource by itself isn't a game. Neither is a engine.
Just a pipe dream, and the term "royalty free" seems to pique enough interest of most people to keep it as the standard. That works well enough until they take the time to read the fine print.
I know that Torque's commercial license is only required for people who make enough to bank a quarter of a million dollars, but I'm sure people will understand that this thread isn't focused on Torque.
About the author
Torque 3D Owner Ted Southard