The article isn't about any actual Linux patent problems. It is about Microsoft pulling an SCO, making vague claims in order to spread fear along with the absolute refusal to back up those claims. Any honest claim of patent infringement would have included the list of patents. Anything else is FUD. Put up or shut up.
The problem with bluffing is that you eventually have to put your cards on the table to actually win. I hope Microsoft gets roasted by estoppel if they ever sue anyone over these alleged patents (remember, we don't even know that they exist). The longer they wait, the worse it will get.
But I don't think they will ever sue. That's not their plan, which is to use fear to drive people, if not to Microsoft, then to its partners. Patents have to be shown and defended, but vague threats do not, unless a Linux distributor sues Microsoft like Red Hat sued SCO. That would be fun, and there wouldn't be an IBM case around to unfairly stall the suit.
ROFL! Right on que you post more of the same bull. "Linux doesn't infringe on any patents, couldn't possibly. It's all the fault of that eeeevil Microsoft." LOL leep fooling yourself, because any halfway honest rational mind knows Linux could infringe on the patents of many others than just Microsoft. Studies done by those directly involved with the Free Software Foundation have already openly admitted it, and that Microsoft only owned ~10% of what was found. % of what