They've been granted some defensive patents, but publicly pledged not to use them except to defend themselves and Open Source software.
They're on track to make their fist billion in revenue at the same point as Microsoft did in its existence.
Red Hat turned it down outright. Think of how much that would've benefitted Red Hat. That was well more than half of their revenue at the time. They stuck to their principles at the expense of that type of massive profit. It paid off.
In time perhaps we will view the failings of the FCC as the failure of MMS, I hope not.
"In an unusual provision for a technology company, Google will create two classes of shares with different voting rights, a move that aims to guarantee that founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page will maintain decision-making authority"
A clause like that doesn't affect the type of lawsuits I am talking about.
"Don't be evil. We believe strongly that in the long term, we will be better served-as shareholders and in all other ways-by a company that does good things for the world even if we forgo some short term gains. This is an important aspect of our culture and is broadly shared within the company."
I guess the exceptionally weak phrase "even if we forgo some short term gains" included in a non-legal document isn't really much protection.
