@jetah Yeah, it appears to me more like a blatant lie. They maybe told them on some meeting, but they came probably to some sort of an agreement something. Probably something like this:
Unity - "If you want to continue your services, you will have to buy additional licenses"
Improbable - "Why? It is not against EULA or ToS?"
Unity - "We will change it."
Improbable - "So? You will just cut many, many Unity users out there? Especially those small studios that would struggle to have their own server?"
Unity among themselves - 'So, how is our own cloud service? When it will be ready?' 'Maybe in a year, or two, or maybe even later'
Unity - "Ok, nevermind, we will not change it (for now)"
Improbable - "Oh, glad to hear that, you had me worried there (that you are the same greedy bastards as <currently input nearly any AAA company>)
Unity and Improbable shake hands and never speak about it again, not untill Unity suddenly changes their ToS a year/two later when their own cloud service is ready and the other companies providing similar solution as Improbable agreed to pay additional money and lets Improbable know about it in the most horrific and terrible way - outright terminates their licenses.
Please note that these are only one of many possible ways it could went by - as currently it is a word against a word and they will definitely not share any internal information with us - although Unity could as they claim Improbable breached the ToS and EULA after they were warned multiple times, so they should not longer be protected by the terms agreed in the contract... so what is the point in not revealing the information that would clear Unity's, therefore their own, name?
On the other hand Improbable claims there was no breach, not until the change in ToS, which would put the contract into more of a dispute state in which sharing internal information would be a huge breach of the contract...
So as I see it, the contract has been most probably held true and now it is more of a dispute of whether the change in ToS has been formarly and properly communicated with Improbable and whether they even breached anything (it may be even part of the contract that the T&C cannot be changed for x years).
Where are the lawyers when one would need some insight into the local laws applied to the contract, respectively what would be the reason behind Unity only "claiming" and not providing any proof.
