Legally speaking you are correct. Practically speaking, I'm not sure it really matters.
It seems like this is a project written by one guy to make his job easier, in light of Microsoft's own Android/VS project he made the decision to release this project to open source expecting a decrease in interest over time (Android++ appears to have some benefits over the official project for now, but realistically speaking just having the full support of Microsoft behind it versus the effort of one guy means Android++ loses over time). His employer got involved because legally they own the copyright since he wrote it while being employed by them and in service of his job there, and they okayed the open source release but ultimately didn't want to get involved in any way that they might be seen to have any liability, thus the kind of nonsensical license.
(All of that is totally speculation on my part, fwiw).
But given all the above and the fact that you don't need to distribute Android++ code as part of products you make with it, I can't imagine anyone practically claiming any copyright violations as a result of any of this even if the license is legal mumbo-jumbo.
I wouldn't be particularly worried about using Android++, worse case scenario you get a cease and desist on using it, but since it is a development tool you can pretty easily just switch to Microsoft's project at that point (copyright issues with the development tool shouldn't taint the end product you create with it in this case) and practically speaking nobody is going to issue that C&D.
My bigger worry than the copyright concerns (if I had any vested interest in the project) would be the Android++ name due to the obvious trademark violation, which is harder for everyone involved to just ignore if they are made aware of it.
At any rate, misunderstanding of software licenses wrt open source is a pet peeve of mine as well, so I think pointing out this issue is totally valid, but practically speaking I wouldn't worry about it in this particular case if I used this software.
" I can't imagine anyone practically claiming any copyright violations as a result of any of this even if the license is legal mumbo-jumbo."
As mentioned, naturalmotion could actually probably sue every downloader/user for copyright infringement.
Would they?
Who knows.
Now practically, most of the time you are right. The problem is what is practical now doesn't always stay that way. Companies get acquired, change owners, people's monetary situation changes, etc.
More often than not shit gets weird before rights get extinguished.
So my experience is that 90-95% of the time, you are right, nobody cares, it all goes according to plan.
The other 5-10% of the time, it requires lawyers and a lot of money to unf*ck it.
Hacker news rarely hears about these cases, sadly.
So sure, if you want to play the odds, go for it.
But I find engineers are very Laissez-faire about this kind of thing right up until it comes down on them like a ton of bricks.
It seems like this is a project written by one guy to make his job easier, in light of Microsoft's own Android/VS project he made the decision to release this project to open source expecting a decrease in interest over time (Android++ appears to have some benefits over the official project for now, but realistically speaking just having the full support of Microsoft behind it versus the effort of one guy means Android++ loses over time). His employer got involved because legally they own the copyright since he wrote it while being employed by them and in service of his job there, and they okayed the open source release but ultimately didn't want to get involved in any way that they might be seen to have any liability, thus the kind of nonsensical license.
(All of that is totally speculation on my part, fwiw).
But given all the above and the fact that you don't need to distribute Android++ code as part of products you make with it, I can't imagine anyone practically claiming any copyright violations as a result of any of this even if the license is legal mumbo-jumbo.
I wouldn't be particularly worried about using Android++, worse case scenario you get a cease and desist on using it, but since it is a development tool you can pretty easily just switch to Microsoft's project at that point (copyright issues with the development tool shouldn't taint the end product you create with it in this case) and practically speaking nobody is going to issue that C&D.
My bigger worry than the copyright concerns (if I had any vested interest in the project) would be the Android++ name due to the obvious trademark violation, which is harder for everyone involved to just ignore if they are made aware of it.
At any rate, misunderstanding of software licenses wrt open source is a pet peeve of mine as well, so I think pointing out this issue is totally valid, but practically speaking I wouldn't worry about it in this particular case if I used this software.