Kinect support?

[Phopojijo]

Always read the EULA before making profound statements. It's not 'just another controller' using the existing input frameworks. It's proprietary hardware, using proprietary software. The moment you start reverse engineering it and sharing what you've learnt with others, you're in dubious territory - although the hobbyist hacking scene is generally ignored. The moment you start trying to sell a product based around hacking proprietary hardware/firmware, then you're in more-than-dubious territory. It also only takes one little firmware update to undo all that reverse engineering, and then you have a product which you've sold to people that doesn't actually work anyway.

UE3 Kinect support will be based upon the official licensed implementation for the 360. It is not written nor intended to be compatible with PC hardware or operating systems. There is no official driver, it will not be included in UDK until there is one.

You don't see companies selling hacked drivers for video cards, hacked software for printers or in fact any almost any other device you plug into your PC.

Let's not forget a recent Microsoft press statement either:

Yes -- lets look at an even more recent Kinect press statement:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2...m_campaign=rss

The Kinect's open-source PC drivers allow coders to have their way with the hardware, and we've already begun to see interesting things coming from the community. On NPR last Friday, a company spokesman said that wasn't an accident: Microsoft left the USB connection open by design.

That could be a retcon—or it could be the truth—but it's nice to hear Microsoft be so welcoming of third-party drivers on the hardware, especially since the announcement was made in such a public forum. And we already have a real-time lightsaber demo... and that's pretty much wicked.

((Disclaimer -- this following explanation of what happened obviously isn't official -- but is my best guess (also best guess from journalists who reported on this topic) as to what happened.))

Basically what happened was the first Microsoft reaction was from a bored and jumpy lawyer... and then Microsoft's actual managers made an official stance that was completely backwards from what the lawyer said.

Think of it like Epic when they sent cease and desist to that guy who made Gears of War dolls for their brother... ... until Mark Rein said (paraphrased) "Uh yeah our lawyers thought you were infringing our trademarks... you're doing something cool... and not even selling it... keep being awesome bud!"

[Hboybowen]

Yes -- lets look at an even more recent Kinect press statement:

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2...m_campaign=rss

((Disclaimer -- this following explanation of what happened obviously isn't official -- but is my best guess (also best guess from journalists who reported on this topic) as to what happened.))

Basically what happened was the first Microsoft reaction was from a bored and jumpy lawyer... and then Microsoft's actual managers made an official stance that was completely backwards from what the lawyer said.

Think of it like Epic when they sent cease and desist to that guy who made Gears of War dolls for their brother... ... until Mark Rein said (paraphrased) "Uh yeah our lawyers thought you were infringing our trademarks... you're doing something cool... and not even selling it... keep being awesome bud!"

good point beware though lol(debate ensues)

[Blade[UG]]

Also, there's no ambiguity on hardware "licenses" vs software. You buy a piece of hardware, you can do what you want with it, so long as you don't brain someone with it or something otherwise illegal.

[ambershee]

Or sell software for it.

[Blade[UG]]

I think we determined back in the 70's, when RMS dealt with the printer manufacturers, that no one could tell you what kind of software you had to use with hardware you own. I'm pretty sure that if anyone tried to take legal action like that, it would get laughed out of any court.

Where are stipulations like this, in the docs?

[ambershee]

SALE OF software.

not

USE OF software.

Author/Vendor/Distributor - not End User.

Jebus >.<

[Hboybowen]

SALE OF software.

not

USE OF software.

Author/Vendor/Distributor - not End User.

Jebus >.<

yes so using the unofficial kinect for pc tech would not affect you in any way like I said ages ago.

[ambershee]

Except that as developers, we're selling the software? Why is this so hard to understand?

[Blade[UG]]

I'm pretty doubtful that anyone could say what I can sell, if I'm not selling your stuff with it.

[Phopojijo]

Also, there's no ambiguity on hardware "licenses" vs software. You buy a piece of hardware, you can do what you want with it, so long as you don't brain someone with it or something otherwise illegal.

Some manufacturers (Apple -- "Jailbreaking", consoles themselves, etc.) would disagree. Microsoft in this case, however, seems to say "Have at it".

I'm pretty doubtful that anyone could say what I can sell, if I'm not selling your stuff with it.

They'll still try if it's in their interest to.

Hell, in the early days a lot of DVD players with DivX support was unlicensed because they figured DivX wouldn't have the resources to sue them.

There's plenty of companies who hope that they can get away with **** because their target doesn't have the money to figure back.

[Blade[UG]]

They might disagree, but it's not within their rights to be able to come after you for hacking a device that you own. Now, if there's a service that goes along with that, it is totally within their rights to disallow people from using hacked units on that service.

Now, it would be a little more grey area, if you were selling software that was purposed for doing something illegal - such as breaking copy protection, as that would get into a DMCA violation, potentially - but still only for the people who actually -used- the software. Aside from export violations on crypto, I'm pretty certain that I could sell any kind of software I wanted for any kind of hardware, and the only boo the hardware manufacturers can say is "we don't endorse this", "we won't support this", and "if you use that software, your device isn't getting on our service".

[Hboybowen]

ok so USC integrated Kinect with WoW. The explanation is in the video and could be applied to UDK. WoW(world of warcraft) is a cooked and packaged game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62wj8eJ0FHw

-take that ambershee lol

a download to the SDK is in the video

[Phopojijo]

They might disagree, but it's not within their rights to be able to come after you for hacking a device that you own. Now, if there's a service that goes along with that, it is totally within their rights to disallow people from using hacked units on that service.

Now, it would be a little more grey area, if you were selling software that was purposed for doing something illegal - such as breaking copy protection, as that would get into a DMCA violation, potentially - but still only for the people who actually -used- the software. Aside from export violations on crypto, I'm pretty certain that I could sell any kind of software I wanted for any kind of hardware, and the only boo the hardware manufacturers can say is "we don't endorse this", "we won't support this", and "if you use that software, your device isn't getting on our service".

Doesn't matter if they sue you and you don't have enough resources to buy good enough lawyers to prove that it's legitimate.

Hell, it took the Librarian of Congress to shut up Apple's jailbreaking-is-illegal ****.

[Blade[UG]]

It would be their burden to prove that it's not legitimate.

[ambershee]

ok so USC integrated Kinect with WoW. The explanation is in the video and could be applied to UDK. WoW(world of warcraft) is a cooked and packaged game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62wj8eJ0FHw

-take that ambershee lol

a download to the SDK is in the video

They're not selling it. Do you just ignore everything I type?