There is no requirement in continental legal systems to abstain from commenting on a case.
You are approaching this from a common law perspective (=UK, US, Canada, Australia etc.) where this requirement may or may not be present.
Besides, even in common law systems, I highly doubt that there is a requirement to abstain from commenting on your legal views.
You mean to tell me that Microsoft could not send out a press-release saying "this and that company is violating our patents"?
I see this all the time.
Companies usually refrain from doing so because they might tip off the other party about the line of defense/attack they will be using but this should not be confused with a general principle forbidding a party to comment on a case.
There is something as free speech and anybody is free to comment within the limits allowed by the libel laws.
Expressing a legal view (which can be backed up by substantial legal evidence and case-law) can in no way be construed as "libel" which by definition means that the allegation is unfounded.
Having said that, there isn't even a case pending because MorphOS has not entered the market yet.