Frequently Asked Question

05-11-2022 01:51:07 PM EDT - Patty Branscome (Additional comments)

From: Ramsey, Dean
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 9:56 AM
To: Guest, Alex
Subject: RE: OPEN REVIEW - RITM0079288 - Unity Pro by Unity Technologies

Hi Alex,

We received the below back from Tracey Gallagher in VT Legal regarding this one (it appears she added this comment as a “Work notes” in this servicenow instance so I don’t think you can view it there):

Tracey Gallagher / Work notes 10-17-2023 10:52:49 PM

@Dean Ramsey I have reviewed the Unity terms multiple times in the past and have never been able to approve them (RITM0055212, RITM0030014, and RITM0051150 for using the Unity Asset Store). I also reviewed the terms of use in 2020 but do not know what ticket that was for - it is not coming up when I search SN. Since this is free and does not require signature - contrary to the intake questionnaire - this request may be able to go through LRLC, depending on if Rick is comfortable from the FERPA side. Otherwise, it would need an AoR as in prior cases. But that is dependent on Rick's FERPA position also. I can set my denial out in the ticket or you can discuss with Rick and see if this can be processed with LRLC. I know I will not be able to approve the terms.

Based on Tracey’s above comment and the fact that Rick had approved this instance back on 5/24/2022 (noted in this ticket) based on any students having the option to not use their VT credentials, it looks like you have (2) options:

1. Give it a try in the Low-Risk Low-Cost service now process (this might be the best option due to the expediency of obtaining a response to quickly know if it qualifies or not and this would allow your Department Head to sign off for your instance only. I realize you had a concern about this being used across departments on campus, however, given your use case you might be able to obtain approval through the Low-Risk Low-Cost option for your use case. The other departments using would either have to use this same process or go through option 2 I have mentioned below. If it qualifies, and your Department Head is willing to accept any/all risk and sign off, you could proceed and be approved to use throughout your department in this instance.
2. I could request Tracey set out her denial in this current ticket, then I would draft and route an Acceptance of Request memo through Procurement leadership, then send to you for your Dean or Department Head to review and sign for acceptance of all responsibility. In this option, we would have to wait to see Tracey’s actual denial statement in the ticket to determine if your AoR would need to be signed at the Dean, VP or department Head level.

Please let me know if you interpret Tracey’s comments differently and would like to proceed on another path. I could also attempt to pull Tracey in on this thread or make her Comment viewable to you on this ticket in SN. Due to the enormous backlog currently in the VT Legal task I am not real confident we could get a response from her through either of these in a reasonable time but am willing to try if that is what you prefer.

Thank you,

Dean Ramsey, CUPO

Senior Buyer

Virginia Tech | Procurement

North End Center

300 Turner Street, Suite 2200

Blacksburg, VA 24060

P: 540.231.2882

deanr22@vt.edu