So, did they patent it or not? And if they did, then who the hell approved it as a valid innovation???!
If they didn't patent it then it's just a case of straight up fraud isn't it? Conversely, if they do actually hold this patent, then isn't just as clear cut that this poor guy is infringing it - no matter how ridiculous that seems? The article seems to suggest that they are now reviewing whether the patent is valid or not - but once a patent is granted doesn't that automatically mean it's valid too?
What's embarrassing is that you continue your association with an author who has shown himself to be of poor credibility.
There are less conspiracies going on in the world than you think.
Granted, not all of these are of the highest quality, but it may jog your memory of a few projects which are used in high demand environments everyday.