Wouldn't the key part:
in response to completion of a task, modifying the task list during the interactive code development session to indicate that the task has been completed."
mean it doesn't apply?
Worst case, just put a US exclusionary clause in the release so US copyright law doesn't apply. At least Europe is ahead of the US in this and doesn't allow such trivial patents and considers them invalid by definition.
Needless to say the number of cubes someone had, the more clout they had and it became a dick measuring contest.
There are VPs and distinguished engineers with 100s of cubes.
So no personal experience, but I definitely think it's pretty frivolous; I don't imagine its ever been tested in court. :)
 https://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1040068/microsoft-... from 2004
 https://www.geek.com/news/microsoft-granted-patent-covering-... from 2010