It's not great. Using any of those effectively GPL's ( or some free licence) any code you use. It has the potential to establish a pattern of explicitly mentioning patents which gives legitimacy to software patents. It will be the first thing the corporations cite when they start to nail people for infringing some of their obvious patents: "See, you use and cite IBM's function call patent. You use our mouse click idea and we have a patent for that idea. By your own standards you should pay us."
The goal should be to fight against the language of patents. Everyone knows that you can express ideas metaphorically in terms of 'devices' That's almost the definition of what computer science is: "a language of ideas that can be made concrete" Even reading the patents brings into use a vocabulary of devices that has had precedents set in law.
Also, while I'm not quite clear on the fine details of patent law, note that all of these have quite a number of references. IBM can naturally only allow your free use of IBM's patents, and only the listed 500. You're still on your own licensing the other patents that need to be licensed to make use of the patent. Picking one with a low references count:
I bet most of these lead back to an IBM patent that /is/ still in effect, even for OSS people, along with quite a lot of non-IBM patents. (Perhaps I'll end up crawling the network of them myself -- look for Patent::USPTO on CPAN soon, or yell at me.)