this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
702 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

59087 readers
3267 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] falkerie71@sh.itjust.works 94 points 1 year ago (4 children)

JFC, I just learned that they are retroactively applying this new rule. This means that games that are out already or have been on sale for multiple years will have to pay the runtime fee too. Insane. They can bankrupt a studio before they even release their next game.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 83 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I still can't believe that retroactive fees like that are legal.

[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They aren’t and likely won’t hold up in court.

[–] snooggums@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gotta pay the lawyers to go to court though.

[–] vanontom@geddit.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Hope enough teams can band together and file jointly, combined with decent fundraising and fair lawyers.

Fuck these Unity execs and their ilk. I guess they need more motivation to run a business properly, and not be rampaging sociopaths and enshittification experts. Perhaps some lawyers and lawmakers can offer them some humiliation and fear of personally feeling the consequences of their actions.

[–] WHYAREWEALLCAPS@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

Welcome to capitalism! Ain't it grand!

[–] BURN@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Because they’re not charging for previous installs, not new ones, and they operate technically on a free “subscription” model it’s going to be hard to challenge legally

[–] Cavemanfreak@lemm.ee 29 points 1 year ago

I don't think they can enforce that, right? I assume that would be a change of the contract, which they can't just do willy nilly.

[–] dust_accelerator@discuss.tchncs.de 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah, I think that's straight up illegal and I would simply refuse to pay.

If they can retroactively change terms, why can't I, as a bonafide counterparty in that agreement? Maybe something like a 100% discount on runtime fees for days that end with 'y'.

Otherwise I could simply "retroactively apply" a 100% discount on my lease or new car purchase.

The correct answer and what all studios/devs should do: tell them to retroactively pound sand and ditch Unity for all future projects.

[–] AnonStoleMyPants@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think this is true? Their site https://unity.com/pricing-updates says "The fee applies to new installs beginning January 1, 2024"

[–] Heavybell@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

New installs not new releases. So if you put out a game a few years back and suddenly a bunch of people start installing it on their new PCs, you'd get hit with this fee… assuming it is legally enforceable.

Hell, even if it isn't strictly legally enforceable, if you still need to deal with Unity in some way in future you could be forced into dealing with this fee in order to get Unity's cooperation.

[–] AnonStoleMyPants@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Oh yeah good point. The word "retroactively" just gave me the idea that it would apply to old installs, because this whole thing is about installs.

Still, that is a major dick move.