And they claim that they aren't litigious with patents, and they haven't been yet. But to paint them as the victim is disingenuous -- while they don't use patents offensively, they have many other tools at their disposal that they do use offensively, market share in advertising and search amongst them.
Google is a massive company with massive resources. They happen to be exceptionally smart and know how to use tools outside of litigation to achieve their means -- but that doesn't make them any less a monopoly or anti-competitive company; far from it.
It's impossible to view Drummond's post in a box -- it's not just about how patents hinder innovation -- /everybody knows that/ already. But Google does everything for a reason, they are very strategic. Since Google knows it has better tools to be competitive outside of patents, it is in their interest to eliminate patents as a source of pressure from competitors.
And if you invent something amazing, and you patent it, and then Google decides to copy you -- you may not feel that patents hinder innovation as much as you do right now. But since they are a behemoth with lots of other tools at their disposal, they want to eliminate a favorite weapon of their competitors. Smart, but altruistic it may not be.