Do no evil?

There is no much discussion about the good thing that Google is for everyday's life and it is very difficult to imagine our modern life without Google. So, lets start making something very clear: Google is a great thing (this blog is provided and hosted for free by Google and most of the links are normally found using Google). But, is it still the case that the company believes the number 6 of the 10 things that has found to be true? It seems that after going public the pressures of keeping its market value rising have make a dent on Google's philosophy of doing no evil. Regardless how much spin is put around it, to try to justify censoring China's Google by saying that by doing that you are actually allowing many Chinese people to access more information is simple difficult to sustain (it looks like the market was too big for not doing some evil, what could be confirmed by the way Google snatched Dr Lee from Microsoft and offered him an unprecedented extremely generous compensation package). Then, the issue of Google library project, in which it seemed that the original ideal was to engage in a massive exercise of copyright infringement; the copyright infringement of the thumbnails of Perfect 10; the copyright infringement lawsuit from AFP; the strange arrangement with AP (which had everyone guessing due to its confidentiality); and now the problems with the Belgian court. But again, it is possible to argue that for being so innovative Google is forcing the discussion about a clear definition of fair use (although that is a concept foreign to most continental European copyright laws). Can be argued that reproducing a part of a work that could lead to the original one is not copyright infringement (as Google does and claims)? Or, on the contrary, the function of a search engine is to point to the information without showing it and, by displaying part (in the case of images it could be a substantial part) of the information there is a clear copyright violation (in some instances the information provided in the Google summary is more than the user is looking for so there is no need to go to the original? Courts are not being consistent, again, but it would be good to imagine Google as the champion of the fair use and freedom of use of information...until you remember that is the same company that threatens people who use its name as a verb...
Probaly -do no evil- sounded nice for a couple of grad students who created the most amazing tool for finding and retrieving information but has no place in the world of a mega corporation willing to own the world...