cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/5555641
Developers of indie puzzle game Orgynizer have claimed that Unity said organisations like Planned Parenthood are “not valid charities” and are instead “political groups.”
In a blog post, the EU-based developer LizardFactory said the plans to charge developers up to $0.20 per install if they reach certain thresholds would cost them “around 30% of the funds we have gathered and already sent to charity.”
As Unity clarified the runtime fee will not apply to charity games, LizardFactory reached out to the company to clarify their game would be exempt from the plan.
However, Unity reportedly said their partners were not “valid charities” and were viewed as “political groups.”
Profits made from the game go directly to non-profit organisation Planned Parenthood and C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital, Michigan.
“We did this to raise money for a good cause, not to line the coffers of greedy scumbags,” the developers wrote in a blog post. “We have been solid Unity fanboys for over ten years, but the trust is scattered all over the floor.”
The developers are considering a move to open-source game engine Godot, “but we will have to recode our entire game because we refuse to give you a dime,” they wrote. “This is a mafia-style shakedown, nothing more, nothing less.”
Today, Unity responded to the ongoing backlash and apologised, acknowledging the “confusion and angst” surrounding the runtime fee policy.
The company has promised that changes to the policy will be shared in “a couple of days.”
Well you simply couldn’t be more wrong about that. The NFL was a charity not too long ago. I’m sure there are Christian conversion therapy “charities”, too. “Charity” is nothing more than a tax status. You can make a charity for anything, so long as you keep your finances appropriately.
I assume the NFL is/was a 501c6 tax exempt organization since it calls out football leagues specifically.
You’d be looking for 501c3 organizations which does include churches and other dubious religious affiliated organizations but not all federal non-profits.
It’s still not political since there’s no active choice to accept some and reject others, it’s purely based on tax status. That’s it, no politics, just facts.
The political quandary does not come from the tax status, it comes from the service they provide. If you think abortion is not a political topic then you need to dig your head out of the sand.
I’m not saying it isn’t. I’m saying that if their policy is to not look at the services they provide and only their tax status, they can stay away from the whole political angle. But as soon as they block just one tax-exempt org, then it becomes political.
Correct, which is what has happened here. The user above I think is misunderstanding the situation, or is perpetuating right-wing drivel. Due to the state of political discourse in the States, I’m going to take a guess it’s the latter, because I’ve learned not to give the benefit of the doubt.