Marketplace Policy on Copyright and Trademark-Protected Content

Since this is a proactive move on Epic’s part and we are not aware of actual infringement claims against these items, we will not be contacting buyers if something is removed. However, any asset that is removed will continue to be available for download from the vault for folks that have purchased it. It will not be available for new purchases.

You can also navigate directly to any asset that has been removed if you have the original URL, but you’ll see that it is not available for sale. If you have purchased it at any time, the asset will continue to appear in your vault. Searching for the asset on the marketplace will yield no results.

I am using mostly some unreal marketplace characters, vehicles and some forest and dungeon assets, so they probably haven’t copyright issues

Happy New Year to all the Epic team and unreal users.
After reading this post, I found the idea of ​​@Luos more than indispensable, as he mentioned some articles must be provided by Epic so that content creators know how to go about protected content by copyright. I produced a car pack that I could not publish because they were under copyright and I think other content creators have experienced this problem. This is of paramount importance, indeed on the asset store a car without brand or any identifier is perceived as clean, while at Epic it always remains under copyright, it is clear that Epic does not manage in the same way the copyright and therefore must give necessary indications to facilitate the life to the creators of contents. We understand that Epic wants to avoid some copyright problems for buyers, only this policy seems to limit the production of certain products in the marketplace and is not necessarily easy for the sellers / creators of content.

Not linked: I still do not know how to get a marketplace content creator badge

I got mine sending e-mail to mp support.

@Amanda.Bott posted this thread: forum post where you can put your questions and read others too. As far as we are currently understanding, the perception for a copyright being violated also resides in the shape/silhouette of the asset, afterall you dont need the Mercedes Benz logo or the car name appearing to realize it is a Mercedes and depending on the details (lock at door, frontal lights, etc) you can assure even the model… and this is what might be caught and told as being copyrighted. It occurs with toys as an example, where you need to license with the copyright owner for that specific design. Please, do add any other question for that post, think ahead and Im sure more doubts will occur.

Seriously? My code plugin is in Approval since 11/21/2017. 33 working days. Nothing’s changed. Nothing is better now.

4 Packs pending approval here. :stuck_out_tongue:

Hey there - I followed up with your pack and it was accidentally marked as a duplicate due to its name being similar to another pack you submitted. The team is fast-tracking your asset and it’ll be going into review shortly. Apologies for the mix-up there!

Hi Amanda, can you please tell somebody to also look up #98945 ?

We’ve done the required change 1 week ago and it basically only needs someone to allow us to publish but nobody answers in the email.

It’s still in final review, but should be completed within the estimated time you were given.

Thank you very much.
So it was a mistake? Will the promised 10-15 working days be met now?
That was my fifth plugin and I always had to wait about 2 months.

Happy to help! Barring any unforeseen circumstances, your asset should be ready in 10-15 days.

Hello, me again. :slight_smile:
I’m confused right now. I’m programming a new code plugin. I want to use a part of the C++ code from the AudioRecorder plugin. I have sent an email to support and I’m not allowed to use anything from Epics plugins.

Why not? Do the plugins have a different license?

How much of that code is replicated in your code? That code is as free as the engine. The logic 1st applied is that you cannot generate a version of the engine or its components and resell. So, it all depends on “how similar” that part of code is, basically a code is not copyrighted unless that part of the code belongs to a specific algorithm (unless it is yours), technique (unless it is yours) or way that will only work on the engine.

Lets say I want to redesign the Renderer module and make it better. That Renderer, besides it can be switched in the engine code, it so tighly attached to it, that it will not work without the rest of the engine, and probably will not work in other engine aswell, so by design, even if it is better, you cannot sell it, because the intrinsic dependencies. You can thou, have it as part of your own custom engine version (4.18.2.Socke81) and create a game and sell this game, but you can’t come up with this piece of code and try to sell for the engine users, because the dependency makes it not belong to you.

Im sorry if Im not well enough in english to explain this, but I hope I could achieve it.

  1. Epics AudioCapture plugin can record audio and convert it to UE4 specific audio formats and .wav format. I am working on an voip/voice chat plugin. I want to use few parts in my own code. Not a exact copy but parts to get data from mic and maybe to convert it to a sound cue or wav.

  2. Epics AudioCapture plugin uses a thirdparty library. This:
    The RtAudio Home Page

I asked the support whether I could use this library too. And is this still Third party? It is a part of UE4.
I was told not to use anything. That’s why I asked here. This can’t be right. Why shouldn’t that be allowed?

I have checked the page and you can use it “if” you follow these instructions at the License page:


RtAudio: a set of realtime audio i/o C++ classes
Copyright (c) 2001-2017 Gary P. Scavone

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the “Software”), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

Any person wishing to distribute modifications to the Software is asked to send the modifications to the original developer so that they can be incorporated into the canonical version. This is, however, not a binding provision of this license.


check that you MUST put the copyright notice somewhere with your product source folders and also put it on the files where you use the library code, including the link as Epic did. It is also a good procedure, to create a document with the link and its content, the use you will give to it also, to be autenticated at (notary’s office - register) that the link at the date of the authentication had the exactly text above. It is your safeguard because that content might change and you need proof you are legal.

Hi all,
I wanted to make sure everyone saw that we’ll be having a livestream today to talk about copyright and trademark laws. You can find the details here.


Well, in most cases these aren’t actually copyrights in question.
The rights that may be involved here are either design patent rights or the so-called “trade dress” rights.

  1. The design patent rights actually grant the owner copyright-like powers over ornamental (e.g those not dictated by the item’s function or constuction) features of the design (this may be the whole external look of the issue, if not dicated solely by technical considerations). These rights however, last AFAIK 15 years in USA and up to 25 years elsewhere (the laws differ from one country to another). So things designed before 31.12.1992, or 31.12.2002 for the US are most likely free from design patent rights.

  2. The trade dress issue is a bit trickier. The “trade dress” is actually a trademark right, granting the owner trademark powers over ornamental (e.g those not dictated by the item’s function or constuction) features of the design (this may be the whole external look of the issue, if not dicated solely by technical considerations).
    Becaus it is a trademark right, “trade dress” could be registered in only one country, or it several, or variably across the globe.

Here ( ) it is possible to consult the register (not all countries are covered, but international trademark applications as well as US, EU, Canadian, German, and some other trademarks are.
If a particular design is not registered as a trade dress, things actually get much easier - unregistered trademarks are granted far less protections if any at all (depends on the jurisdiction in question, really).

As the “trade dress” are trademarks, they are protected only if a) the have the capacity to indicate a source of origin for goods, b) they are used in commerce and not abandoned. From there arise several considerations.

  1. If an unregistered trade dress have become generic (this means the desing is used in commerce by several different firms, each marketing the design under their own trademarked names for significant time) it is not protected and more still, no-one particular would be there to complain alleged misuse.
    Considering the question of firearms design (they, as I heard, caused most questions here) this means that designs like M1911, or generic pump-action shotgun, or generic lever-action Henry rifle are free to be exploited by members
  2. If an unregistered trade dress is not used in commerce by the owner (item get out of production) it is not protected. For practical considerations the designs originating with the now-defunct manufacturers or those out of production for a decade or more are most likely free to exploit.

Also, some specific cases you might find somewhat interesting

  1. The M16 rifle. Associated trademark and trade dress ( ) invalidated and declared generic. With the patents on it also expired by the virtue of time passed - no restrictions would apply on using the design.
    PS: Colt, FN, Colt’s and FN’s logos and brand markings remain trademarked
  2. The M4 carbine. Associated trademark and trade dress ( ) invalidated and declared generic. With the patents on it also expired by the virtue of time passed - no restrictions would apply on using the design.
    PS: Colt, FN, Colt’s and FN’s logos and brand markings remain trademarked
  3. MP5 SMG. Trademark applications ( , DPMAregister | Trade marks - Register information ) refused on grounds of the design being functional or aesthetically functional.
    PS: H&K, their logo and brand markings remain trademarked
  4. XM8 rifle. Trademark application abandoned ( ) more than 10 years ago.
    PS: H&K, their logo and brand markings remain trademarked
  5. Beretta 92FS (M9) pistol. Trademark application abandoned (** ) more than 20 years ago.**
    PS: Pietro Beretta firm, their logo and brand markings remain trademarked

Hello Epic Games, you just approved a stolen copyright infringement asset:

This assets has been stolen by the SMOLIGE from Velking Labs original creator of this assets, here is the original asset by the original content creator:

Please take down the asset released by SMOLIGE which infringe copyright of the original content creator - Velking Labs.

Hi! I’m a Bologna Business School’s student and we are doing a project on virtual reality world.we ask you only few minutes to fill in our questionnaire in this link. Thank you so much!