Software patents are bad, yet they still exist, and you have to live with that reality. Red Hat is not just filing for defensive patents, it is also pouring resources into patent reform. In an ideal world, software patents would be a non-issue, and Red Hat is at the forefront of making that a reality.

In the current reality, it's impossible for OSS to infringe on Red Hat's patents because of the patent promise which is legally binding and irrevocable. I have no idea what Red Hat's strategy for infringement from non-OSS software is, but it sounds like it's a 'live and let live' attitude. As long as you don't attack Red Hat with your patents, Red Hat won't come after you with theirs. Given reality, that seems an entirely sensible and prudent stance.

At least in the case of Netscape, this is a very strange view: Tim Berners-Lee tested his ideas at CERN in Geneva, which is funded by several governments; then some people at the NCSA (government funded) thought it would be a good idea to implement a browser for this web-thingy. Then Andreesen met Jim Clark, convinced him that that would be a great business idea, hired all his coworkers (who had developed their crucial know-how on government money) and went to unbelievable success.

No, Netscape was not created by the government. But government funding was crucial to get it to a point where something could be shown to investors to get them interested.

BTW, how do you think Universities fund their research ? NSF, NIH, Army, Navy, Air Force.