   A slippery slope (UDK related)
  The UDK license requires an a commercial game created by an indie to fork over 25% of profits above 5k.Now, would this be a legal loophole? Lets say I create an game, lets say an FPS with one level. But I made it so so you can customize it in anyway you want. Create your own levels, characters, story, etc. But I give the game away for free, so therefore you don't make any profit off of the game.Then I turn around and make tools for customizing that game. The customizing tool does not touch UDK whatsoever, it just creates ... I don't know... a text file/models that the game can read to place in game. Then I sell the tools. Would the profit from the tools be counted with game?So, basically, is it a breach of the license since I made something completely separate but is designed to be closely used with the game using the UDK.   
  It may be a loophole, but even if it is, that won't stop Epic's lawyers from taking you to court, where you'd have to hire your own lawyers to prove that you're right......which would probably end up costing you a lot more than the % they asked for in the first place :P   ;  I don't really doubt it. But hey, it's a thought.   ;  So, lets get this straight; you want to use an engine which would normally costs upwards of a couple of 100,000 USD for free and then try to make money off it via some sort of loop hole?You honestly don't see a problem with this?Not that is matters because as I recall the license agreement for the UDK covers you making money in ANY way related to the UDK, so even with this plan you would still owe them... Frankly, given the quality of the toolset you are getting, something you'd never get access to any other way, 25% after 5K really isn't too much to ask imo...   ;  I'm not even using it to do this. It's just something I thought up and decided to post what people might think the repercussions are, so stop jumping down my throat.   ;  I'm not a lawyer and haven't read the UDK license but if it's written anything like the Open source licenses there is a clause for what they call derived works, which might include in this case the file formats and extensions to which you add to the UDK engine to read your data. So your not skirting around any potential loopholes. Lawyers are paid to think about these things and come up with ironclad licenses, I'm sure Epic have good lawyers.Good Luck!-ddn;  They probably do. Well, it was just a thought anyway.   ;Quote:Original post by pothbso stop jumping down my throat.Settle.  phantom is just answering your question, not personally attacking you....and I agree with the others.  Your proposed loophole is very likely covered by the licensing terms, and even if not you'd potentially be facing a very expensive lawsuit to prove otherwise.  These types of loophole idea -- even if theoretically sound -- are rarely a good idea in practice.   ;  First I will say that questions like these are best asked on the UDK forums. Specifically the thread titled "Legal Questions Answered".Second: I am not a lawyer, make what you will of what I say.Moving on.Don't do it. The licensing terms are quite clear, and unless you have a sizable legal team that could defend you against Epic you will more than likely lose any potential case that comes from it.(The searching for a loophole in regards to advertising has gone on for awhile in that topic)In the end this would would be seen no doubt in much the same way. You would be seen as using the tools as some sort of a proxy in which to obtain money from your game. (I say this because the argument was brought up about advertisements being on a site that hosts the game. It was determined that the advertisements are just being used as a way around selling the game in an attempt to circumvent the license royalties)   ;  Oh, its nothing I'm attempting. This is more of something to just think on. So I just wanted opinions on it. It's why I don't attempt to go to their site to ask or anything like I'm serious about it.   