The way this has been written makes it a for cost software versus free software - implying patents are used by commercial or for charge models versus free software. This is just plain wrong and is a clear attempt to set out the adversaries as patent versus free. Companies and inventors in general do not "use patents against free software."  They protect their legally granted rights of invention from being used without permission, whether they choose to charge or not. If an inventor were to take action, it is not against the free software as this is written. The way the article begins, indicates the inventor would somehow haul the free software into court and take legal action against free software itself. Somehow there would be a court case InventorX verus Free Software Bits. Moreover, the News.com articles makes it seem as though it's patents versus all free software, or the software cost itself. This is clearly wrong and short sighted. Patents are not about cost of product. None of the above is to start an argument about patents granted for software inventions - that is a different topic. In fact, that is why this article is so disturbing to me...