How would a commitment to not use their patent portfolio offensively prevent them from effectively using it defensively?
For the commitment to be meaningful at all, it has to be partially binding, which could be exploited. And a totally nonbinding one could just as easily be given by a patent troll.
> For the commitment to be meaningful at all, it has to be partially binding
A non-binding and less-meaningful commitment would still be something. They could easily start there and they have not.
I don't see what they'd gain from that. Also, could calling your own patents "defensive" be seen as admission that they're bogus?