PROJECT-> End User Licence Agreement: Interpretation

[Keygen]

So if I add a graphic or make a patch that only adds the appropriate lines of code instead of including modified versions of files found in the source code do I make it without my work being considered a New Game Material and get rid of the restrictions?

[Locutus]

Basically, yes. The restrictions about distribution, access, etc mainly apply to the code itself: only those who signed the EULA may have access to it.

For the compiled ctp2.exe file, you can do with it what you want: those who just want to play CtP2 with a modified (or unmodified, as the case may be) exe file don't needs to sign the EULA, so they don't have to obey it either. However, as creator of the exe, you still have the responsibility to make clear to your users that they can't sell the game (and you can't sell it yourself either, obviously). Preventing commercial distribution seems to be the main restriction the EULA was written for.

[Gilgamensch]

the EULA is mainly, that nobody is able to sell a new version of the game, as this would mean infringment of the EULA and he could be dragged to court. That is the main reason behind.

What activision allowed us with the EULA is:

1.) We can modify as we want.
2.) They are not responsible
3.) They still own the code. They even, to certain extend own 'our' code.
4.) They can always produce a new version of it and so on.....
5.) The risk is all ours

This brings me to a good point Locutus:

We (Apolyton) shall include a similar warning as Activision, saying like We are not responsible for damage, whatever out of the mod.....(same stuff they included in the EULA).

[Locutus]

Yeah, every mod and scenario has such a warning (or at least should have), our code will obviously have such a thing as well.

[Gilgamensch]

I must admit, I can't remember anymore........

But we shall keep it in mind.