I recently encountered the Unity Reference-Only License.

Is there any freedom allowed by this license that wouldn't be allowed already simply by an "All Rights Reserved" copyrighted publication of the source code? In other words, is there anything they are granting beyond what is granted by the default copyright, as described on OpenSource.SE?

I'm wondering why they bothered to write an explicit license when it seems on the surface of it that the same effect could have been achieved without doing so. Perhaps there is some subtlety I'm missing.

  • 3
    Note that while the license is very close to the default legal state (clause 6.1 is extraordinarily pointless), there is some value in reminding users of these restrictions – especially considering there are many different jurisdictions across the world. And there are a few differences: license to reproduce and use for reference purposes, reproduction on a Repository Service (= forking on GitHub, but would be allowed anyway through GH's ToS), disclaimer of liability (not relevant in all jurisdictions), and choice of governing law. – amon Oct 29 '18 at 20:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.