This strikes me as typical of the whole "culture should be free" argument…
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/15/business/media/15illo.html
The comparison between Google and traditional companies like Nickelodeon and Target (about halfway down the article) is good, I think.
I have the feeling that, in the past, it used to be commonplace for large corporation to patronize the arts. By patronize, I mean pay artist, of course. Or, if not for big corporations, at least big, rich industrialists. But Google has more cash than all of these past institutions put together. They don't want to patronize the arts, but rather speak patronizingly to artists…