He interprets the agreement with a wide scope that throws the burden on the submitter on any IP owned by third parties which is used when the submitter allows the submission to be applied by Microsoft.
This doesn't mean we can't be on the store, but that we should be careful when applying.
Was the lawyer paid for the advice (i.e. this is an official opinion), or was it a friendly email reply or BBS response? Is the lawyer familiar with crypto?
Could NEM use it in a future dispute for example?
Pro-bono and hence a friendly note. So no strings attached. Lawyer is very familiar with software and IPs and has more than 30 years experience in this. He has seen enough of this. Agreement has nothing to do with Crypto. It was more about the code, submission, and IPs.