...it's an option. Keep it turned off and move on with your life.
Never understood why it bothers people so much
Probably because it could've been used for higher IQ or higher resolution screens, and I'm not fond of the scanline-esque effect. Best you could do there is keep it VERY low and you'd still have to stay in the sweet spot. But Nintendo probably would've just gone for weakers parts with the same IQ and lowered the price instead anyway, or the difference wouldn't be too big (more games reliably hitting 60 FPS with polygonal visuals?)
And yeah, if the screens are fundamentally different... no, this is not a victory to celebrate (though I'm not sure this is patent trolling either, just someone sore over missing out on a deal with Nintendo.) The INTENT of the patent system is protect your invention, but outline how it works so people can then try a different approach to the same end result (glass-less 3D in this case), and thus driving innovation. We don't want to just patent the IDEA of glass-less 3D, that doesn't stifle innovation, just has people stacking claims in whatever pops into mind without actually being created first or even able to be created in the first place. It's the problem with software patents far as I can tell, a lot of them are more for IDEAS than actual APPLICATIONS.