Definition of "External Funding"
by Marc Dreamora Schaerer · in Torque 3D Professional · 03/25/2009 (10:51 am) · 4 replies
I would like to get some clarification on the "External Funding" used in the T3D feature comparision table.
According the table, external funding is only allowed for studio licenses.
Sadly the table misses any clear definition of external funding.
To explain this better, I should point out that I work as freelancer on my own.
As such there are cases where I am payed by third parties to develop functionality for them (be it the whole base of a game or only a specific feature)
This could be seen as an external funding.
For that reason I require clarification on this specific aspect.
I assume that the idea of this is what commonly was covered by the "yearly turnaround" clause in the previous torque licenses, that if the whole project is funded with big bucks from outside, I (or in such a case commonly my team) would require to get a studio license, not that external funding means any cash inflow from external to me. Or simply said if the project development is outsourced completely to me / my team.
Am I right on this assumption?
According the table, external funding is only allowed for studio licenses.
Sadly the table misses any clear definition of external funding.
To explain this better, I should point out that I work as freelancer on my own.
As such there are cases where I am payed by third parties to develop functionality for them (be it the whole base of a game or only a specific feature)
This could be seen as an external funding.
For that reason I require clarification on this specific aspect.
I assume that the idea of this is what commonly was covered by the "yearly turnaround" clause in the previous torque licenses, that if the whole project is funded with big bucks from outside, I (or in such a case commonly my team) would require to get a studio license, not that external funding means any cash inflow from external to me. Or simply said if the project development is outsourced completely to me / my team.
Am I right on this assumption?
About the author
#2
Fully understand your intend with it and I think the intend behind it is completely fair.
Will be very complex to write that out that it works out as intend.
I guess the final definition will be a mix of what was present in TGEA already with the turnaround and who is in control of the project (full project outsourcing vs outsourcing it to multiple single users with pro licenses only).
03/27/2009 (5:35 am)
Thank you :)Fully understand your intend with it and I think the intend behind it is completely fair.
Will be very complex to write that out that it works out as intend.
I guess the final definition will be a mix of what was present in TGEA already with the turnaround and who is in control of the project (full project outsourcing vs outsourcing it to multiple single users with pro licenses only).
#3
I never thought I'd say this but... Hire a lawyer. It will probably save grief in the long run =\
03/30/2009 (6:56 pm)
Quote:In any case, since I'm not a machine that can auto-translates intent to legalese, I'll probably need to think it over some and make sure this would work just as intended.
I never thought I'd say this but... Hire a lawyer. It will probably save grief in the long run =\
#4
04/06/2009 (10:41 am)
We have our lawyers look over our contracts before we put them up. We try to get the intent in there; then they translate it to legalese. 
Torque 3D Owner Brett Seyler
Default Studio Name
There is no definition yet because I haven't written one :) GarageGames' intent is to disallow only for large commercial publishers and developers to use Indie licenses simply by outsourcing the work to a smaller or a bunch of distinct individuals who each qualify for an Indie license on their own. For example, let's say Eidos wants to use Torque 3D to build the next Tomb Raider. They might want to use a lot of contract labor for the coding, but the contractor on that project should be working with a commercial license if we're talking work for hire and Eidos owns all the code. I would expect Eidos to provide the developer with a license from their studio for that kind of use, not get coding work done on a huge budget project on an Indie licenese.
There are lots of variables because all kinds of deals are made these days. There's IP ownership of the work product, there's the scope of the work, etc. I don't want anyone working with Torque 3D to be disallowed from doing what you're describing above. In any case, since I'm not a machine that can auto-translates intent to legalese, I'll probably need to think it over some and make sure this would work just as intended. It's not as though we're hardasses about enforcing this stuff in any case. It's basically the honor system in that respect. But, but of course I want to it be as clear as possible for the end user. That's the way I'd want it if I were purchasing software, though a clear, readable EULA is almost impossible to find these days.