Google says a lot of things. But they've shown time and time again that they're willing to ignore their past promises and do whatever they feel is in their best interests at the moment. Remember "Don't be evil"?

Even if they were sincere when they said that, I fully expect that they would have changed their minds within a few years of actually winning. Remember, they've already shown a willingness to use patents offensively.

I disagree, microsoft tried to destroy linux by coercing companies to pay a bogus linux tax. Microsoft also footed the bill for SCO's case against Linux. MS' record is atrocious here.

Motorola Mobility sued apple in 2010. Just last month Motorola filed a motion to reopen their case against Apple.

Again, all of these companies are deeply involved in this game of patents.

> Motorola Mobility sued apple in 2010.

As far as I know Google acquired Motorola Mobility in 2011. So they had nothing to do with the original suit. As for last month's one, I don't know about the details.

> I disagree, microsoft tried to destroy linux

Where did I say Microsoft was clean ?

Please. Stop acting like Google is some innocent child. It's pathetic.

Google has been using SEPs as weapons and undermining standards and the huge benefits they bring to humanity.

If I were to blame one company for undermining standards, it'd be Apple for consistently refusing to license standards-essential patents and Obama for protecting Apple. Remember, the reason all their other competitors have so many standards-essential patents and Apple have essentially none is because the other companies worked to develop those standards and Apple just came along years later and took the benefit of their work for free whilst suing them over dubious software patents.

What's the point of putting in the work and money to actually develop standards if someone can walk into your industry, take all that work for free, and use their non-FRAND-licensed patents to stop you from selling anything? Far better to forget standards, abandon fundamental technology work, and spend the time and money building your own non-FRAND patent warchest instead.

Apple has a fair number of standards-essential patents as well, but they have not been used in a lawsuit to date. These include networking patents (notably zeroconf) and are always made available by Apple via the following statement:

In the event that the technology discussed in the Document becomes an IETF standard (the "Standard") which is not materially different from the Document, Apple agrees, upon written request from a Party to negotiate outside of IETF to make available a non-exclusive license under reasonable and non-discriminatory ("RAND") terms and conditions under such claims of the Patents that are essential to implement a product compliant with the Standard (a "Compliant Product"). These RAND terms and conditions may be conditional upon a reciprocal grant or defense use.

However it has yet to demand reciprocal grants of design patents from others for licensing.

The company has not refused to license SEPs, it has refused to license them with a cross-patent agreement that includes their design patents, as their view is that SEPs should be offered on fair monetary licensing terms.

That does not necessarily mean their stance is right (or that Apple is innocent because they're quite clearly not), but it's a lot more complex and defensible than you've implied here.