1) They're not going to actually enforce it because that would damage their image significantly.
2) In the absolute best unicorns-and-rainbows case, I can even see Google using it to demonstrate how ludicrous the patent wars are getting these days. This even makes a little bit of sense, given that the first hundred hits (on bing!) for '"Google sues" patent' are for patent countersuits.
even if current Google will not use this patent immediately, future Google (5 years, 10 years, 15 years, ...) will use ever patent in its pocket to hinder competition.
(edit: Maybe there is already, IANAL. Like what Manfred does in Charles Stross' Accelerando).
The motto again? They are a public company. They have a silly motto on a wall and laws they must obey. When the two are in conflict with each other which do you think is going to be followed?
I have to say though, if this whole thing has taught me anything it's taught me that every business I make from here on out is going to have some sappy stupid motto. That way, even otherwise intelligent people like are found on HN will give me the benefit of the doubt every time I do something that is in my interests and against everyone else's.
If I held Google shares I'd actually consider it a breach of their fiduciary duty for Google's management to waste resources and goodwill pursuing a suit over something so trivial.
Given the things they've already said and done (e.g. the cell thing, "if you've got nothing to hide", the fake china pull out) I don't buy it. They've got enough people to buy into this "Don't do evil" nonsense that even if they did sue someone over this silly patent a million google defenders would pop out and explain why they just had to do it.