|
Post by indiedev on May 19, 2017 5:58:21 GMT
from developer.nvidia.com/gameworks-source-sdk-eula: 'You will follow NVIDIA's specifications for NVIDIA's Marks as to style, color and typeface as provided in developer.nvidia.com/gameworks-logo and submit a sample of each proposed use of NVIDIA's Marks at least a one (1) weeks prior to the desired implementation of such use to obtain NVIDIA's prior written approval (which approval will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed). If NVIDIA does not respond within ten (10) business days of Your submission of such sample, the sample will be deemed unapproved.' 'Trademark Unavailability. In the event that a partyโs Mark ceases to be available for use with respect to the Agreement, the other party, as its sole remedy, will be released (unless such unavailability arises due to the action or inaction of that party) from any obligations to use such Mark unless and until the same becomes available for use.' ------- edit: you are still likely required to include a written notice in the games credits such as: 'At minimum, You will acknowledge the copyrights of NVIDIA as follows in the manual (if any) and in-game credits of any Game or Demo that uses NVIDIA GameWorks Licensed Software or portions thereof (e.g. VisualFX SDK, ...). "NVIDIA GameWorksโข Technology provided under license from NVIDIA Corporation. Copyright ยฉ 2002-2015 NVIDIA Corporation. All rights reserved." '
|
|
|
Post by TinSoldier on May 19, 2017 18:56:34 GMT
Buttt..
3drad does display the logo, so i think anything we make with 3drad qualifies as a derivative work.
any mention of that in the licensing ?
|
|
|
Post by indiedev on May 20, 2017 4:41:59 GMT
the editor displays it yes, but the compiled games do not, even the old nvidia eula required emailing nvidia for icons and usage guidelines, the ones in editor were sent to fernando - not us. things have changed since then, it was early days for physx before it's free unity mass implementation, if every bad android game displayed nvidia logos it would make them look as bad as what unity does to some people.
i updated the 1st link above so anyone can now view it without membership, also note at end of page the 'Link and Guidelines for Use of NVIDIA GameWorks Marks' is now dead, seeming that they don't want just anyone using it now.
---------- [edit: note that unity games display only the unity logo and NOT a physx logo even though it uses physx]
|
|
|
Post by TinSoldier on May 20, 2017 21:14:19 GMT
well just for the heck of it, i was bored, so i send an email to the nvidia licensing department asking about the logo usage, and for completeness, also included a link to 3drad software.
I will update here with whatever response i get back from them.
|
|
|
Post by sbdjazz on May 25, 2017 18:35:48 GMT
OK, After a long time I stumbled on this thread. I have contacted NVidia Licensing Authority about the use of NVidia Logo on 3DRad derivative games. They have said that it is allowed or rather recommended to use the logo to show the use NVidia SDK in your game and take legal measures to ensure that your game is not hackable to the extent of decompiling the Physx System. You are allowed to launch your game with or without the logo unless you are making an engine or game editing kit which allows the end-user to directly get access to the source of the SDK. In your EULA, you must prevent any reverse engineering of your game by law.
|
|
|
Post by indiedev on May 26, 2017 3:34:15 GMT
so did they send you the logos and usage guidelines? as they are no longer hosted on the site it seems - or did you send them a sample copied from rad to approve?
another issue is that rad does not include the SDK, only the redistributable dlls part and likely some pre-compiled object code, did you mention that in your email? as they may be under the impression that YOU are implementing the SDK in your game, as they likely don't know or care what rad is and whether it includes SDK access or not.
in any case, if you have individual approval it does not also give every other rad user approval.
|
|
|
Post by sbdjazz on May 26, 2017 18:57:03 GMT
Yes I mentioned the details to them properly. No logos were sent by them and no details regarding where to get them, (considering that they are available everywhere like youtube). I have told them a lot of the most important things about RAD including its original developer and also sent them a copy of the EULA that comes with it. NVidia now provides a derivative license to the SDK. Clearly speaking, NVidia takes no fees or royalty from you for shipping a game with PhysX. The License Fernando had is slightly different and in his case he had to take proper permission from NVIDIA and most likely send a copy of 3d rad to Nvidia for testing. If you are making an engine or a game from scratch using the SDK directly, you have to make sure that it is compiled or hard coded in to the software in a way no one can reuse it. Watch how the 3D RAD eula prevent you from ripping the engine apart. The games that are made as derivative product from a engine which already uses the SDK at its core don't require any such permission. Cause the engine developer has already taken care of that hard part for you. Your game must bear the NVidia PhysX EULA and your own EULA preventing any one from reverse engineering your game. About the logo, well a part of the license makes it mandatory to use it (correct me if I'm wrong) to identify the use of the SDK and for giving proper credits to NVidia. Here's the mail I got:
Hello,
The EULA gives you the license to make a game or games using PhysX, and to ship those games to your customers, without fee or royalty to NVIDIA, provided that the game ships with PhysX compiled into object code such that your customers cannot re-use the PhysX library in stand-alone form. In other words, so long as you are not shipping a game engine that others will use to make games, you are free to ship PhysX-enabled games to your customers under the EULA.
--Mike
|
|
|
Post by indiedev on May 27, 2017 7:56:11 GMT
the section you refer to:
5b. 'For Games, Demos and other applications that incorporate NVIDIA GameWorksโข or portions thereof, the NVIDIA logo must appear, on splash screens and on the back cover of the instruction manual, if applicable, or similar placement in an electronic file, at least in parity with other technology providers and IHV partners.'
is correct, just not your interpretation of it, you can't take 1 section literally without refering to other sections that reference it [section 7.3, and also point 8 of NVIDIA TRADEMARKS AND GUIDELINES both that i quoted in 1st post]
you, nVidia, or anyone cannot reasonably expect that ripping logos off utube videos is a standard business practice, but if you submit such a logo and they approve it then that should be ok as long as you quote the video you got it from, and have permission from the video copyright owner. the point i'm making is that without approval or availability of the logo [from nvidia, not utube] you are released from the requirement to use it.
i will notify nvidia when my game is near release and ask for logo use approval, otherwise i will just tell them i'll use the written credit, and i'll keep a copy of any emails sent/replied [if given] as a record.
this is my interpretation of the eula, but i am not a lawyer, if you can't understand what i mean i suggest you speak to one yourself.
|
|
|
Post by sbdjazz on May 28, 2017 5:17:36 GMT
Yeah I understand. I always had that confusion regarding the logo.
|
|
|
Post by TinSoldier on May 28, 2017 19:50:26 GMT
I personally haven't received a reply from nvidia .
I am not concerned about displaying their logo or physX.
Anything i distribute would be shareware / freeware or donation-ware .
The basic rule of law is, you have to lose something before you can sue.
If anything i share gets hacked, i would consider 3impact or 3drad to be at fault here, even if logos are required to be displayed, then 3drad should be doing it, IMO .
I'll wait for the lawsuit before i lose sleep over this.. or at the very least a reply to my emails... still waiting...
|
|
|
Post by indiedev on May 29, 2017 7:58:12 GMT
tin, that's the whole point: no reply after 10 days means you are NOT approved to use the logo. i'd be surprised if they approved any indie game using rad's outdated v2.8.4 SDK unless it's something unique, but AAA games using latest v3.4 should get approval.
...but sure, it's a eula for a free physics engine so they are unlikely to pursue minor infringers who don't read/follow it properly, but why even use it if you are not required to - will a big brand logo make your game seem more credible? -maybe, but it's unlikely to help if it sucks anyway.
|
|
|
Post by sbdjazz on May 30, 2017 18:17:04 GMT
Its not a matter if your game is made by a new engine or an old engine. If your game lives up to the quality that makes NVidia proud, then they would surely send you a logo. Don't worry about this in the first game. And there is a very bad concept of defining AAA games as only those games that use the highest quality engine and highest quality graphics. In fact any good game that can attract a large number of people and has the capability to start a million dollar franchise is a AAA game and companies like NVidia often benefit from them.
|
|
|
Post by indiedev on May 31, 2017 4:21:38 GMT
i define AAA games as being made by dedicated studios of multiple professionals with big budgets, mainstream promotion and a publisher, not 1 or more independent devs [indies] working from a bedroom, even if they achieve a high quality it's still not AAA, as pro indie games are refered to as 'triple-i' and cannot be compared to something out of their reach.
if it takes 30 devs 2 yrs to make a AAA game, it's just not physically possible for 3 indies to make the same quality and content in that time.
|
|
|
Post by sbdjazz on Jun 2, 2017 11:17:59 GMT
Heard of a game called "Pathways into Darkness"? That game was one of the oldest and most commercially successful games. It involved high level of economic risk and made huge profit just like todays aaa games. This game was awarded as the best role playing game award at macworld and the game of the year of its time. This game was made by just three people in a small apartment room. Add two more people and you get Marathon which was a hit too. This game did so good that the team got offers from multiple companies like Microsoft, Apple, Activision. It is the game that kick-started a multi-billion dollar franchise called "Halo". I am not saying that you are wrong. The best thing about AAA game development is that you don't know when your game can become so popular that it can change the face of game industry. You might end up developing such a game that a day after release you may get a call from EA. Say your indie game was named "A1" and after its success you get a budget of a few million dollars, two years of time, and a whole production facility, shifting your office from your college dorm room to EA facility. And you make a game called "A2" as a sequel to "A1". People would naturally start considering your first game which was made by just three developers at par with todays AAA games. I was talking about the beginning of a industry while you were thinking about the established industry. In that way we are both right!
|
|
|
Post by indiedev on Jun 3, 2017 14:07:39 GMT
if your dream is to work for EA then good luck, but staying indie means you are free to work at your own pace and style without exec's breathing deadlines and design changes down your back, if i can make a modest living doing what i enjoy i would not even return a call from the likes of EA offering more money.
|
|
|
Post by sbdjazz on Jun 6, 2017 5:56:57 GMT
I just gave an example of EA, its not my dream. And stop misinterpreting me.
|
|
|
Post by indiedev on Jun 6, 2017 9:59:50 GMT
right-o, but i'm not sure of the point you are trying to make. AAA is subjective, so you are free to interpret it any way you want, but for the vast majority it generally means: A] the best cutting-edge tech currently available for GFX, details & physics B] a large amount of content and gameplay C] a large budget and team to achieve the above + promote it a game that fails any 1 of those is not AAA, but indies can still grow to make as much money as AAA - just look at the more recent example of minecraft - the biggest seller of the decade, but it still fails A] due to sticking to it's roots of simple, blocky art style, so it's an indie game, now owned by a AAA studio.
comparing AAA to indie as a genre is like apples & oranges, they can never be the same.
|
|
|
Post by TinSoldier on Jun 6, 2017 17:06:52 GMT
Ha AAA for me is the same as any company calling them selves the #1 dealer or developer, the #1 means nothing laterally, its OUR interpretation that being #1 is the best, or top of the list, or having the biggest sales figures. PS, i believe AAA actually started out from phone book usage, remember those phone books. They often list companies based on their company name alphabetically. Companies soon realized adding an A or 2, or more A's to their company name would list them before the other guys with a single A in the name. (a lot of people probably do call or visit the first company listing they see, just to save time ) Also because it's an A or triple A, were right back to assuming A or 1 means the best company, or top of the list means their better than the rest, etc,etc,etc... ALSO did i forget to mention, that i am the #1 3drad developer in north america , and a AAA developer too .
|
|
|
Post by indiedev on Jun 7, 2017 5:42:29 GMT
in saying that then you are denying your indie status? different parts of the world may have different contexts, but i know if walk in to any game shop in australia and ask for the latest AAA title, they'll offer battlefield, CoD, GTA, NFS and not 'race for the sun' or whatever the latest indie hit is.
whether you agree or not, that's how the masses think, so claiming to be AAA when you are infact indie will just confuse them, or damage your credibility.
-so be indie, and be proud of it!
|
|
|
Post by Famer on Jun 7, 2017 14:37:04 GMT
|
|