I think this whole situation has been blown out of proportion.
How will this code, that allows loading a 3rd party DRM plugin, be conceptually different than the bit of code that allows loading other closed source plugins (Flash, Silverlight, etc)?
I think you chose the wrong example. I imagine the water in any decorative fountain being in a closed circuit, with some pumps that move it around. It's not like leaving the tap running all day and pouring it all down the drain, if that's what you thought.
Microsoft reaffirms stance against web ads: "The web should be clean and free of these obtrusive, virus laden, obnoxious commercials"
All I'm trying to say is that's easy to attack something that is not part of your own business model. Google doesn't sell software for a living. Of course they don't care about software patents. Even more so, they profit the most if everything is "free". Well not really free, but paid through ads.
I was always under the impression that hate speech is not merely a regular speech, but usually implies an instigation to harm against a certain group of people.
It's one thing if I'm just a regular Joe and I say: "I don't like gay people" and it's quite another if I'm the leader of a religious movement and say: "All gay people are a disgrace to god and moral values and cannot be tolerated. I urge true believers to bring swift justice against them".
I think that only the second example fits the hate speech category and should be punished.
I have read the Bible and it's clear for anyone who thinks objectively that the whole thing is thought and written by men, not by a god.
I could also recommend books by Dawkins or Hitchins, if we're on this subject.
You are not right in your beliefs, you only think you are.