Some software licenses (e.g the Apache 2.0 / GPL 3) do contain very specific clauses regarding patents. One can terminate the license agreement if patent litigation is initiated, the other stipulates that recipients of a covered work must also receive an irrevocable royalty free license to use, modify or distribute work covered by a patent. While I agree that questions purely about software licensing should be off topic here, there are some areas where the two mix.
Redhat in fact made history with a deal that allowed them to distribute JBoss under the terms of the GPL3.
I do agree with Robert, but would hope that we take care to make sure we're not in one of those overlapping areas before casting close votes.