This question has been asked a few times, but the answers and questions don’t exactly match the parameters we’re looking for, so we wanted to get clarification.
If we were to create a rendered out animation using Unreal Engine 4’s sequencer and were to put this in a separate game engine, would we have to pay royalty on this?
Judging from the EULA, it’s not quite clear to us because it mentions in parts that no royalty is owed on still images. However, couldn’t you argue that video is simply a collection of still images?
Say for example were to create the rendered out animation and gift it to a separate company, who then made a game using the rendered video, what is the stance there? Because they wouldn’t have signed the EULA and we haven’t broken the rules of the EULA as we did not release the video as a product. I don’t understand why we’d be forced to pay for actions of others, especially if the output was released as a linear video file CC-0.
What if we were to transmutate the rendered output by 2D rotoscoping the output (as an example), transforming the output. At that point, would royalty be owed then. If so, clarification on the reasons why would be helpful.
If we can get some clarification here, it would be helpful. As a small developer, we are evaluating our options on where to produce the rendered animation for our project and the EULA as it stands is quite murky on this subject.
Based on your question the output from UE4 when placed into an interactive product would make the project a Product per the terms of the EULA and a royalty due.
I am also curious on the answer to this, it’s hard for me to understand why you’d have to pay the same royalty as if you developed your full game in Unreal Engine 4 if you export a video rendered in Unreal Engine 4 - that uses assets generated outside the engine and the engine doesn’t get used past the point of a renderer. Does this mean that you could look at it as “Use us as your renderer but WHAT you do with that content, we’ll decide if we want money from you”? The point where something becomes a product outside of Unreal Engine but remains an Unreal Engine product confuses me. Wouldn’t this mean that monetisation on YouTube with that “Choose your own Adventure” video style people sometimes do means you owe Royalty? If not, why would they be royalty free but doing on a different platform incur a royalty payment?
Based on your comments, it sounds like you don’t disagree that the resulting game would be a Product under the EULA. If you’re not following that line, I can walk you through how that works in the EULA.
It sounds instead like you’re saying you don’t think the EULA, or at least part of it, would be enforceable in court. I certainly disagree, but I don’t think this is the appropriate venue for discussing litigation strategy.
I can’t speak for Joviex but I would certainly appreciate if you could walk me through the whole “Product” situation in the EULA. At least to me, there are parts I’m having difficulty following, for example the still images Vs video parts and when my output becomes a product and when it is not. Thanks!
I’m sorry but I’m not sure that I follow all of your comments/questions. High level, royalties are owed on Products (unless a royalty-exclusion applies). And use of UE4 to create a video game means that Product is royalty bearing.
I’m not familiar with what you call choose your own adventure YouTube. Normally speaking, there is no royalty on Products which are linear video (the normal content on YouTube). It’s an interesting question if there is some kind of semi-interactive video content.
Just to truly prod your brain whilst your here, when technically would a video be classed as “Interactive” as opposed to non-interactive? I believe that is the part I’m struggling to grasp in the EULA.
So video that can only be played from start to finish is counted as non-interactive? Does that mean you could do something essentially like your games intro cutscene in Unreal Engine 4 as a rendered video and put it in a different game engine?
A video that plays from start to finish is non-interactive. If that video is the Product, then no royalty is owed. However, if that video is placed into a full interactive game, the game is then the Product.
I think I understand now, thanks. So as long as the video is a separate entity, such as a YouTube video or a video basically not packaged with a game or interactive experience, you owe no royalty, even if you sell the video as like a DVD or digital download?
UPDATE - after internal consideration, we’re going to change the Licensed Technology definition in the near future. After that change, a linear-only use of UE4 will be royalty free, even if used in another engine’s game.
I hope you don’t mind me asking about this while it’s probably not finalized.
According to this blog post “Licensed Technology is defined to include Content, and Content includes Marketplace Content.” Does it follow that rendering Infinity Blade assets in UE4 is a linear-only use of UE4 and therefore the resulting images could be used outside the engine? Specifically, could I then create a sprite sheet of Infinity Blade characters (algorithmically turned into pixel art) and release them as CC0 resource for everyone to use?
A video that plays from start to finish is non-interactive. If that video is the Product, then no royalty is owed. However, if that video is placed into a full interactive game, the game is then the Product.
