Torque EULA Discussion

#141 @Everyone - We are struggling a bit with the multiple copy concept ourselves. If an indie is allowed to have, say five copies, that's not really a big deal. If a company with twenty developers has a hundred copies, that seems strange to me. I'm interested in the community's thoughts.

The question of what happens when you pass $500k will likely be solved by the FAQ. Part of the reason we want to work with people directly is because many of those deals require special and unusual cases and volume discounts. All of those deals are based on a standard and I don't see what we can't share that standard to reduce the fear that we are looking for an opportunity to price gouge.

#142 I think any concern over the game/non-game breach I might have had was addressed in the draft. Extending that to include TorqueX + XNA is an unexpected, but welcome, addition

Everything else seems logical and easily understood, although I wonder about the validity of waiving trial by jury.

I do see the point that has been raised about section 3.4.3 in regards to defining "backup". EDIT: no actual real thought on how to address this issue however...

Section 3.4.4 would only pertain to binary users wouldn't it? Think about it: We (pro licensees) have got the source so there is no need to reverse engineer, decompile, or attempt to derive the algorithms of the Software... we only use, improve, and expand upon the stock functionality ;)

#143 @Eric: First off we should define if "If an indie is allowed to have, say five copies,..."(from your above post); is the same as "Backup/Archive" copys(from the question about this EULA draft)?

EDIT: darnit that was sloppy question...
Is the idea of a backup the same as the idea of a copy? THAT is the question...



Because the stipulations for "Installed number of SDK" as EULA stated are perfectly reasonable, and I do not think that is even in question here.

#144 @Caylo - Perhaps we need to clean that up a little bit. The intent of that section is to allow you to backup the SDK/Installer to protect yourself in the case that it was somehow made unavailable to you. I think you will find this clause pretty common amongst a majority of software EULAs.

I think the weirdness here comes from how tied the SDK is to your project with Torque. This isn't like Visual Studio or Photoshop where there is a very defined split between the copy of your work (solution file or psd file) and the application itself.

#145 Well,

I've sent this draft to our law people. The comment I got back translated into English sounds like this:

"Besides the threee clauses voided by the EU regulations (trial, right to decompile and damage capping) this EULA can be resumed as follows: 'do whatever you want with the engine, just be correct and show our logo'. This is a huge change compared to the previous EULA. The main economic difference we can see is that this EULA allows Towque X publishing on XBLA and WP7 as well without any other licence fee being due."

That said, I really welcome the XNA part allowing Torque X publishing (2.3) not being anymore limited to XBLIG :)

#146 Well said Derek, but im not concerning myself with what the EULA 'is intending' to be saying as much as what the EULA 'IS' saying, by word and sentence and comprehension of(Not interpretation of. Interpretation is for fictional writing not factual writing.)

In concept, as Derek illustrated, there are 3 general 'phases' of the SDK that need to be considered and clearly EULA managed.

We have the original SDK(EULA defined as "Software") as provided to the customer.

We have the SDK with project specific modifications BY the customer, this is no longer EULA defined as "Software", but named "Product" this is a mix of customer owned IP and Torque owned IP.

We have the SDK Archive/Backup controlled by the customer, This SDK is not defined by the EULA at all, but is considered by undefined participial to be "Archive/Backup" a copy. It is unclear if we may have one Archive or just one Backup, and in this sentence we question if the word Archive is the equation of the word Backup.

In total this EULA seems to be saying we may only have 3 'copy' of the "Software" total located across no more then 2 different computers.


Now that I have re-read a few more times the EULA redraft, I think the term 'derivative works' {3.4.1} needs a definition, it is used for a NEW subject separated from "Software" and "Product" as expressed by the language of section 3.4.2.
Clearly the words are talking about two different subjects here, but no one have any idea how "Software" is different from 'derivative works', because the EULA do not define that information.

EDIT: for clarification of my participle usage.

#147 Eric, can we get an ETA on when this newer EULA will go live?
- I'd like to contribute to testing 1.1B2 and check rene's vertex color material flag.

#148 It seems TorquePowered believe this subject to be over. Perhaps we actually are witnessing the top speed of Torque 'legal' at work... Once more... Working hard for their money... Oh and this is a great example of keeping word and TorquePowered being more informative and attuned to the community. I wonder what excuse we get to sludge through this time.

I am a bit bent and twisted, its my irony. Am i out of line again? Is it my sarcastic humor on this matter? Or my constant picking at TorquePowered saying one thing but not fully following up on it? Im going to start calling this pattern of behavior the "TorquePowered fault line", they draw a line then fault it.

Speaking of 'no new information', no new TorquePowered Blogs in over a month? Whats going on Torque? Your fans would love to know how things are going...

#149 @Eb - We literally have one more change that we are waiting for. I've been waiting for it. I'm glad you want to participate on 1.1b2.

@Caylo - Your right, we've been totally heads down the past couple of weeks. We've got good news regarding some key hires, Torque 3D, iTorque 3D, and Windows Phone 7. Btw...one of our new resources is going to be helping us on the community front so that should help with the visibility.

#150 Wonderful news Eric. New 'hires', i have always felt, help both Torque and the community stay fresh and exciting. Torque employ blog posts help keep the community active and healthy. The Torque Community is your largest marketing tool, keep the community truthfully informed and everyone is more excited about Torque.

Several times a month I find myself in conversations with people who have a 'great game idea', and I always point out the great benefits of the Torque Engine, but it is hard to impress a hopeful computer game designing neophyte when the 'WHATS NEW' page reflects month old activity.

#151 Updated EULA posted: http://www.torquepowered.com/company/licensing

-You can now develop on TorqueX for any XNA platform.
-Unlimited licensees for back-up solves revision control concerns.
-Upped non-game to $500,000
-$500,000 limit based on software activities so that farmers and fisherman who make games on the side can make non-games without a waiver.

Lastly, we will be posting our standard non-game prices in the QA page that will go up soon.

#152 Oh, how sweet.

Looks real good so far.

Quote:
3.3.4. notify InstantAction in writing that You are publicly releasing a Product that that was developed using the Software within 30 of the release.

I hope "in writing" also means by email, and i would think that line would be a good place to state the email, or address also.

Two thumbs up for going the extra distance to rework and compile a perfectly logical EULA!

#153 @Caylo: I might be wrong... but my guess is that blogging on IA website about your game is good enough :)

#154 Hi Eric,
our attorney's feedback on the latest EULA is that it is (unintentionally) contradictory on distributing a game made with Torque:

You're right that Section 2.1.1 gives you the right to use Torque 3D to develop and distribute your games, but Section 3.2.1 says you can't distribute their "Software." So if you are incorporating any part of their code into your software, then you have an issue under the new EULA. That said, I don't think this was intentional on their part. In fact, they also say that you can develop and distribute modifications to their software for use in a game, so it would seem odd for you to be able to distribute modifications of their code, but not the code itself.

The old EULA had language that seemed helpful in Section 1: "The runtime may be redistributed royalty free, as long as it is produced using a licensed installation of the Software." Though this language wasn't entirely clear, I take this to mean they were allowing you to distribute the code as part of your software.

thx,
Daniel

#155 @Daniel - I'm afraid I'm not understanding the contradiction. Section 3.2.1 state that you can't distribute our Software unless you follow the restrictions set forth in section 2. Section 2 contains all of those rights.

We wouldn't have much of a business if we didn't want you guys to make games so we are willing to update this if other people are confused by it too :)