Red Hat failed to achieve the Supreme Court decision it wanted

So, Red Hat makes arguments which are unlikely to be successful because of the real political and legal situation and you conclude from that they are being devious with nothing more than a PR stunt? It is not a cheap stunt to go on arguing what you think is right even if you keep losing. I have seen no evidence of Red Hat being two faced about patents. They argue software patents are bad law and bad policy and have stuck with that.

Patent law is ethically flawed at the core. The problem isn't creating a temporary monopoly for someone who invents something new. If there is an invention which we would not have anyway limiting it to the inventor for a time takes nothing away. The problem is patent law is preemptive. If multiple people invent similar things the first to the patent office gets to own all. It means taking away other people's inventions. The key to all of us living together in harmony is taking care to not harm other people while we promote our own well being. Exclusivity in patents is all about harming others. They lose their own work, the patent owner charges rent. It is no different from any other kind of extortion. What a nice shop you have here, shame if it should happen to burn down.

Multiple people inventing similar things independently at the same time is not unusual, it is normal.

Let patents not have this attribute, let them resemble copyright where a violation requires actual copying, and there is no big problem. A just standard would require passing the test of "we are only able to do this because the inventor taught us how". People say it could not be done in practice but that is false. Even places where the knowledge once known is trivial but hard to come by can be recognized. So, this molecule cures migraines? How do we know that? Well, who paid the $500,000,000 it took to prove it really works and doesn't also destroy your kidneys? Our courts deal with hard questions all the time, ridiculous to not even try. Harmful to not even try.

Software is special not because it is math or algorithms or any such thing. It is special because we invent 6 new things by lunch time. Every useful program violates myriad patents for methods and processes which have been independently invented dozens if not hundreds of times by as many people. Of course there is a limit to how special software is. The patent office gives out patents without any regard to novelty. The bar is set so low non-obvious means not patented yet.

Of course lawyers and politicians like it. They are all about arguing over who gets what slice of the pie. They never bake one.