> ... but it's a double edged sword if they're going to ride that reputation (China, open standards, open platforms, etc) and selectively duck the responsibility at other times.

Very well and succinctly put.

It would probably be better if they never took a moral stance because they now risk getting judged by it, and thus appearing to be hypocrites.

That would create sort of a moral void, if you wish, ready for some other company to position itself into.

At the same time the moralistic motto was probably what propelled Google well ahead of others. When I think back, I wanted to work at Google because it was a "do no evil" kind of company. That kind of image will attract certain people. So if it was just a marketing ploy or they actually had to take short term losses in order to abide by their mission statement, it has served them well initially.

We'll just have to wait and see what happens in the future. I think they will start to abandon their moral stance slowly and turn into another faceless multi-billion dollar company.

I don't claim it is a bad thing. I had never bought into its morality anyway, I just bought its stock!