You may use the headset to develop commercial software intended solely for use with the headset, provided that you may only distribute such software via distribution channels that have been approved by Oculus in writing.
What does that mean exactly?
If you release software that is specially made only for the rift you have to use the Oculus Rift store?
Also what about adult software titles? Is it possible to make software that's content won't be approved by the official store and sell it on your own website?
I think that it's more likely a "catch all" clause. I don't think we have anything to worry about, unless a developer were to make some seriously messed up games. Stuff I'd rather not say about on these forums. Worse than the porn apps that we see, anyway.
"Wolf7115" wrote: I think that it's more likely a "catch all" clause. I don't think we have anything to worry about, unless a developer were to make some seriously messed up games. Stuff I'd rather not say about on these forums. Worse than the porn apps that we see, anyway.
but isnt the point of vr to be able to stretch the boundries? How messed up is subjective after all. It may not be your or my cup of tea but then we dont have to play it. It still seems like an intentional level of control that coudl be exploited if abused.
"Wolf7115" wrote: I think that it's more likely a "catch all" clause. I don't think we have anything to worry about, unless a developer were to make some seriously messed up games. Stuff I'd rather not say about on these forums. Worse than the porn apps that we see, anyway.
I don't understand this argument....are you actually willing to cede the freedom to distribute the software you write based on the fact that they probably won't choose to enforce the restriction? Why should oculus be the only company that insists on this right? Would you be OK with giving Logitech veto power over your choice of distribution channels because you used their keyboard to type the code? Regardless of the intent, this is ridiculous language that needs to be removed.
This is in the DK2 EULA not the SDK EULA. To me that says this is more about alternate drivers/SDKs for the DK2 built from scratch than software that utilizes the standard SDK and happens to run on the DK2.
"HartLabs" wrote: This is in the DK2 EULA not the SDK EULA. To me that says this is more about alternate drivers/SDKs for the DK2 built from scratch than software that utilizes the standard SDK and happens to run on the DK2.
I dont see any reference to anything about sdk or alternate drivers:
You may use the headset to develop commercial software intended solely for use with the headset, provided that you may only distribute such software via distribution channels that have been approved by Oculus in writing.
I don't understand how you get that interpretation, but I think it proves the point that this vague catch all is so vague that it could mean anything and thats not good.
Any time you are left to "divine" the actual meaning of some legalese, you are in for a world of trouble.
"HartLabs" wrote: This is in the DK2 EULA not the SDK EULA. To me that says this is more about alternate drivers/SDKs for the DK2 built from scratch than software that utilizes the standard SDK and happens to run on the DK2.
I dont see any reference to anything about sdk or alternate drivers:
You may use the headset to develop commercial software intended solely for use with the headset, provided that you may only distribute such software via distribution channels that have been approved by Oculus in writing.
I don't understand how you get that interpretation, but I think it proves the point that this vague catch all is so vague that it could mean anything and thats not good.
Any time you are left to "divine" the actual meaning of some legalese, you are in for a world of trouble.
Is there a date on this updated EULA that is part of the DK2 manual on when it came out?
Sounds like exclusive content developed for Oculus and advertised as exclusive Oculus content thereby making it seem to be a official company product or partnership product.
But still worded vaguely enough to allow wiggle room in future for apple like distribution restraints. Typical lawyer speak that can be explained off one way then enforced another if market allows. (Competing systems don't fully appear or are not even close in market saturation)
Fire and brimstone coming down from the sky! Rivers and seas boiling!
Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes!
The dead rising from the grave!
Facebook buying the Oculus Rift!
Human sacrifice! Dogs and cats, living together! Mass hysteria!
"Gizmotweak" wrote: software intended solely for use with the headset
This would not cover software that uses the standard SDK as that software is for use with any Oculus headsets and is under the SDK EULA. If this was intended to be agreed to by all developers, it would be in the SDK EULA not a product use agreement. Software intended solely for use with the DK2 that the SDK EULA agreement wouldn't apply would have to circumvent the SDK and hence be an alternate SDK/driver. This clause requires developers of such software to get written permission from Oculus to distribute.
Fire and brimstone coming down from the sky! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes! The dead rising from the grave! Facebook buying the Oculus Rift! Human sacrifice! Dogs and cats, living together! Mass hysteria!
Not to derail the thread but nice tweak to the classic Ghostbusters quote!!! +1 😄
