I realize you say that you don't care about the patents issue, but that's really the only issue. Even if you were to aquire a 3rd party ribbon control, Microsoft has the patents on it and can come after you for violating them. They've explicitly come out and said that people can use it for non-competing products.
The Office UI license restrictions are for the concept of the ribbon, not just MFC's specific implementation of it. See this page for more information.
IMO, if you're saying that you probably would be specifically denied a license due to the product similarity, proceeding anyway without a license probably isn't going to turn out well for you if Microsoft ever catches wind of it.
“主要”一词给人的印象是，只要产品的主要用途与 Word 不同，包含富文本编辑器的产品就可以在其上具有功能区栏。例如允许在签入时添加富文本注释的版本控制系统可能没问题（我猜）。
I suppose what it really comes down to is whether I'm a direct competitor to MS. Any product can use the ribbon as long as it's not a "competing product", whatever that means.
In the context of my theoretical question, I would certainly be a competitor, and so I'd say it's too risky to use any kind of ribbon.
Of course in real life, whether or not you're a competitor isn't quite so black and white. I'd probably go with Option #2 for any product apart from OpenOffice.
EDIT I watched this video and here's a quote from the MS lawyer in it:
"The license is not available for applications that have the same primary functionality as the 5 applications that currently have the ribbon in office. That's Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Outlook and Access."
The word primary gives the impression that a product containing a rich-text editor could have a ribbon bar on it, as long as the product's main purpose is different to Word. e.g. a version control system which allowed rich-text comments on checkin, would probably be OK. (I guess)
If you're interested in exploring the third party component route, the article on CodeProject that I link below features a ribbon that looks a lot like Microsoft's and is freely available (though you'd have to credit the author).
If Microsoft ever decides to come after you, you're dead. Regardless of the merits of the case, you'll be forced to settle just to keep from bleeding to death with lawyers fees. They have much deeper pockets than you do.
And remember that in the U.S. at least, damages for patent infringement are much greater if they can prove you knew about the patent and willfully violated it. Posting in a public forum would be proof enough, I think.
发布评论
评论（7）
我知道你说你不关心专利问题，但这确实是唯一的问题。 即使您要获得第三方功能区控件，微软也拥有其专利，并且可以因您违反这些专利而对您进行追究。 他们明确表示人们可以将其用于非竞争产品。
Office UI 许可证限制是针对功能区概念的，而不仅仅是 MFC 的具体实现。 查看此内容页面了解更多信息。
I realize you say that you don't care about the patents issue, but that's really the only issue. Even if you were to aquire a 3rd party ribbon control, Microsoft has the patents on it and can come after you for violating them. They've explicitly come out and said that people can use it for non-competing products.
The Office UI license restrictions are for the concept of the ribbon, not just MFC's specific implementation of it. See this page for more information.
IMO，如果您说由于产品相似性，您可能会被明确拒绝获得许可，那么如果微软发现风声，那么在没有许可的情况下继续进行可能不会给您带来好结果它的。
为了安全起见，我会选择选项 3。
IMO, if you're saying that you probably would be specifically denied a license due to the product similarity, proceeding anyway without a license probably isn't going to turn out well for you if Microsoft ever catches wind of it.
I would go with Option 3 to be safe.
我想真正的问题是我是否是微软的直接竞争对手。 任何产品都可以使用该功能区，只要它不是“竞争产品”，无论这意味着什么。
在我的理论问题的背景下，我肯定会是一个竞争对手，所以我想说使用任何类型的丝带都太冒险了。
当然，在现实生活中，你是否是竞争对手并不是那么黑白分明。 对于除 OpenOffice 之外的任何产品，我可能都会选择选项 #2。
编辑
我观看了此视频，以下是来自其中的 MS 律师：
“主要”一词给人的印象是，只要产品的主要用途与 Word 不同，包含富文本编辑器的产品就可以在其上具有功能区栏。例如允许在签入时添加富文本注释的版本控制系统可能没问题（我猜）。
I suppose what it really comes down to is whether I'm a direct competitor to MS. Any product can use the ribbon as long as it's not a "competing product", whatever that means.
In the context of my theoretical question, I would certainly be a competitor, and so I'd say it's too risky to use any kind of ribbon.
Of course in real life, whether or not you're a competitor isn't quite so black and white. I'd probably go with Option #2 for any product apart from OpenOffice.
EDIT
I watched this video and here's a quote from the MS lawyer in it:
The word primary gives the impression that a product containing a rich-text editor could have a ribbon bar on it, as long as the product's main purpose is different to Word. e.g. a version control system which allowed rich-text comments on checkin, would probably be OK. (I guess)
即使您使用来自第 3 方控件的功能区，您是否仍然需要获得许可证才能在应用程序中使用它？
Even if you are using a Ribbon from a 3rd party control, isn't it the case that you still have to acquire the license to use it in your application?
如果您有兴趣探索第三方组件路线，我在下面链接的关于 CodeProject 的文章提供了一个功能区，该功能区看起来很像 Microsoft 的功能区，并且可以免费使用（尽管您必须注明作者）。
您将使用的专业功能区（现在使用 orb！）
我还没有尝试了一下，但这篇文章评价很高（FWTW）。
If you're interested in exploring the third party component route, the article on CodeProject that I link below features a ribbon that looks a lot like Microsoft's and is freely available (though you'd have to credit the author).
A Professional Ribbon you will use (Now with orb!)
I haven't tried it but the article is highly rated (FWTW).
或者不使用功能区。
了解 Microsoft，它甚至可能不会出现在 Office 的下一版本中...
节省您的金钱（和声誉！）
要有创意，但也要拿出用户想要的东西。 Ribbon 是一个设计噩梦。 不要犯同样的错误！
Or don't use the Ribbon.
Knowing Microsoft it may not even make an appearance in the next version of Office...
Save your money (and reputation!)
Be creative, but also come up with stuff that your users want. The Ribbon is a design nightmare. Don't make the same mistake!
如果微软决定追杀你，你就死定了。 不管案件是非曲直，你都将被迫和解，只是为了避免律师费流血致死。 他们的财力比你雄厚得多。
请记住，至少在美国，如果专利侵权能够证明您了解该专利并故意侵犯该专利，那么其损失会更大。 我认为，在公共论坛上发帖就足以证明。
If Microsoft ever decides to come after you, you're dead. Regardless of the merits of the case, you'll be forced to settle just to keep from bleeding to death with lawyers fees. They have much deeper pockets than you do.
And remember that in the U.S. at least, damages for patent infringement are much greater if they can prove you knew about the patent and willfully violated it. Posting in a public forum would be proof enough, I think.