Seriously? Your own support team clarified the rules and very little of what you’ve said on here matches up to their response nor the content of the EULA. Feel free to look at my post a few above this one, it’s a direct quote from my support ticket and is what I’m going to consider official. It’s also the only stance that matches the EULA. Spreading misinformation like this is exactly why RL has such a bad reputation as far as licensing goes.
2 Likes
It is clearly stated in the EULA and the Licensing page (see below) that no Reallusion content can be embedded into an application (game) or online service without an Enterprise License. This is not my “opinion” but what is stated in our legal documentation.
However, Support now appears to have stated otherwise so I will urgently seek clarification with them on this so we are all on the same page.
@Pete_RL, thanks for getting with Support to get all this clarified. There’s really 2 areas of disconnect here. The first one is the definition of a character generator and how you’ve stated it doesn’t match what support says it is, nor what most people even remotely familiar with games would consider it to be. The 2nd is that you’re using line D to do some heavy lifting to restrict things. If you really want to be technical, line D would imply that you just flat-out can’t use RL content in applications or online services in any scenario. But it doesn’t say anything about specific scenarios like character generation or inventory systems.
To be clear, when I say you I’m not saying you’re making up rules or whatnot, nor have I ever said that all this is your “opinion.” It’s just that you’re the only RL staff I’ve seen on here or the old forums talking about licensing and what you’ve said in many cases doesn’t make sense. Maybe it’s policy and Support is wrong. Maybe the policy changed when they changed the Standard licensing and removed extended. No idea but as a customer, it’s all very frustrating for sure.
Please follow up with the outcome of this when able. This entire thread has been pretty disheartening to read tbh, as another game developer I had entirely planned on having customizable armor for the players. Seeing that this would be against the EULA makes absolutely no sense and honestly would make me switch away from using CC5 all together. There are some great cheaper alternatives now. My only problem with that I have invested sooooo much money into this ecosystem… just for it to be massive waste of money.
Really wish you guys would be more supportive of indie devs, the base licenses are expensive as it is, enterprise licensing I can only imagine the cost. And almost guarantee I can’t afford it.
I’m pretty sure this is only the case regarding applications other than games, for example professional simulators or video conference software or something similar. The screenshot doesn’t even mention games.
He cut off the image right before the games section. Here’s the full context.
Ironically the documentation Support sent me clarifies line D to specifically target character generation applications and online services. Not sure why it’s needed with lines B and C already covering it but whatever.
Isn’t “embed” the act of taking external software/resources and using them in your own software? I.e. you don’t import them, you keep them in Reallusion’s software, embed access to the software into your own, and manipulate assets via an interface within your own software (which would be an application completely different than what we’re talking about here). So, (C)d of the restrictions don’t apply, period. (C)c literally talks about APIs, which once again is not importing models. So, we really only worry about (C)b, which ironically Peter didn’t even point out … Yes, please, urgently seek clarification, thank you.
@All
If I may, I can clear this up quite quickly. Due to some “miscommunication” on the forums a few months ago, I thought it was in my best interests to clarify how the EULAs with RL works, in the event I risked losing my license so I gave it to my attorney.
The EULA, itself, is quite explicit, but also intentionally vague. Under no circumstances are you allowed to use ANY RL products for use in any sort of “character generator” in any commercial product, unless you have the enterprise license. That’s clothes, avatars, textures, etc. This is simply due to the fact that CC, is itself, a character generator.
However…
You are perfectly within EULA to create a “character selector,” for avatars. RL’s EULA is vague and broad, by design, but I was assured that a pre-generated character, that could be selected does NOT fall under the term “character generator” as the character, itself, has already been generated. If you want to create 10 male phenotypes that have all their morphs baked in from the get go and allow the player to select one of these said avatars, you are not in violation of the EULA. If you wish to use RL morphs as sliders in a generator for your game, it’s a no go.
That being said, my attorney did point out that sculpting your own morphs for sliders is morally grey, but warned against it, as even though it’s your own work it can be considered a “derivative” of their products in court, due to RL owning the TOPOLOGY of the mesh you’re altering and could be sued for violation. (Ridiculous, isn’t it?)
On the subject of clothing, I would advise not using any RL clothing or accessories for your games. It’s best to use clothing from the FAB marketplace, instead, since technically, by RL’s own argument, Epic owns the IP to the Epic Skeleton and if you export your avatars to the Epic Skeleton, binding clothing to it doesn’t fall under RL’s EULA. I would, however, recommend that you do NOT use CC for your skinning of clothing. It still puts you in RL’s ecosystem and it’s better to just avoid it other than creating the individual base characters you plan on using for your game.
Hope this helps!
[EDITED for typos]
That’s pretty much where I ended up on the whole thing as well. Export the base character without clothing and use non-RL content for equipment, skinning it in either in Unreal or Blender. It kind of sucks for RL content creators since there’s definitely some clothing I would have purchased then tweaked to save me some time but because of the vague EULA, it’s not worth the risk so I’ll be using stuff from FAB or making it myself.
I should clarify. You CAN use CC to export clothing for skinning if you export to the Epic Skeletons, but then you’re forced to remove the character, itself, to allow for dynamic clothing. If you’re doing that, you might as well bind it yourself. I did do a request to allow for exporting clothing only, as it’s annoying to convert a UE mesh to the CC UE5 skeleton then load it up in your DCC of choice, to delete the character mesh, itself. We’ll see where that goes. Even if you’re using pre-generated avatars, the need for socket clothing in UE is paramount.
Character Creator is hands down, the BEST universal character creator I’ve ever used, but if Metahumans ever gets better morph tech and allows ease of import/export of custom sculpts, CC is DOA. For now, it’s just best to create generated characters to select from and give up the idea of creating a Cyberpunk 2077 type character creator using Reallusion assets, unless you’re willing to spend a grand on the Enterprise license. RL should go the Epic route and allow for indie devs to use their morphs if under 100k/yr in revenue, but I digress.
Going a bit off-topic now but Mutable in Unreal comes in handy to break a skeletal mesh into different meshes based on materials. So it’s easy to export a fully clothed CC character, import into unreal and feed it to a Mutable CO that splits it into the body and any clothing meshes you have and all will use the same skeleton. You can also use clip nodes to remove hidden geometry from both the body and underlying cloth meshes which can’t be done in CC. Then you just bake the instance and you’re good to go. Obviously going the DCC route is faster for DCC users but it’s a quick and dirty way for those that don’t want to use a DCC to do it for whatever reason.
I have not used this yet. Found out about it, a day or two ago. Is it worth a look? I use a Mel script I wrote for me and my kids use one I wrote in python for Blender to just delete polys based on material. I hated having to tell my kids that they wouldn’t be able to make a 2077-style character creator for their game, using CC5. I’ve just put all my stuff on hold, so I could HD sculpt all the characters they want.
I think it is but I also use it for changing equipment on the player character at runtime so I found the use case I mentioned earlier by accident. If you’ve already scripted it in Blender it’s probably not worth the effort just for separating the meshes at edit time. Now I’m wondering if Unreal doesn’t already have a tool that can do this, or how hard it would be to create one.
UE is extremely limited in poly modification. If you want quick and dirty setup for clothing morphs for your avatar selections, I highly recommend mesh morpher. It works with Metahumans too. It’ll cost you, though. Dev went subscription. 
I have the 5.2 version I bought off the marketplace.
Hi @Pete_RL — I’d like to understand whether this would still be considered “Derivative Content” under the EULA.
With the workflow below, the final deliverable contains no Reallusion mesh, topology, rig, weights, or store content. For that reason, I’m asking for a specific clarification (and if possible, please confirm with a supervisor/legal/compliance), because a generic “the EULA does not permit it” response doesn’t address the ambiguity in how “derivative” is being interpreted.
Workflow:
- In Character Creator, I create a character using only the CC Base Mesh and sculpt edits in ZBrush.
- I export to Maya/Blender.
- I wrap (or otherwise transfer) the sculpted shape onto a brand-new base mesh that I own and that has no usage restrictions (different topology; e.g., a mesh I created myself).
- I place my own accessories (100% original) in equivalent positions.
- I use a third-party commercial rigging system on the new mesh and transfer/paint weights on that new rig (no CC rig data used in the final).
Result:
- No CC topology in the final mesh
- No CC rig, weights, or skeleton data
- No Reallusion store content
- Only a new mesh with my own topology and a third-party rig
Question:
Under your EULA interpretation, would the final exported character still be classified as “Derivative Content” solely because CC was used at the beginning as a concept/starting point? If yes, could you point me to the exact clause(s) that define “derivative” in a way that still applies when none of the original Reallusion assets remain in the final output?
For context: I primarily use CC for concepting and 2D reference. I’m not trying to resell Reallusion assets—I’m trying to understand the boundary of what constitutes “derivative” when the final output contains no Reallusion content.
Thanks in advance for a clear, clause-referenced answer.
How are you using CC for 2D reference when you’re admitting you’re wrapping the model around another mesh? If you have your own mesh and can use Zbrush for sculpting, you don’t need CC. Your logic isn’t making sense.
For example, I use CC 'cos I don’t want to box model, retopo and uv character models. Call me lazy, but I did it for years and with CC, I don’t have to. I know I can’t sell any of my models which uses CC, EXCEPT on the RL marketplace. I can use characters I’ve created using CC in a game, but the EULA explicitly states that you cannot use RL meshes or morphs in a “character generator” in any sort of external software. What I’m reading from your post is that you plan to use CC to concept a design of a character and then WRAP it around your own base mesh, which is the legal gray area I was discussing earlier. Then you claim to use CC for 2D reference, but if that were the case, why would you need to wrap a CC mesh around another one?
Sorry if my previous post wasn’t clear. I was describing a hypothetical scenario. I’m fine with the current EULA as it is, but I think it would be beneficial for Reallusion (and for users) to clarify these edge cases more explicitly.
I don’t plan to reply further or keep reading this topic. Reallusion doesn’t seem interested in clarifying the details, and I assume they simply want people to contact them directly.
Same here, that’s exactly what I use CC for too.
Cheers.