The problem in this story isn't Google, or the con-artist, or the drug-dealers, or the people buying the drugs, or Canadians, or GNU hippies or people born on Wednesday or whatever they're trying to spin it as... the problem is the US government. The government has no business attempting to regulate voluntary transactions between free individuals, or trying to regulate how people medicate themselves.
I think the problem is more nuanced than that. The regulatory ability of the government is a premise of governance; governments are designed to invoke fear of a Leviathan force so that the polity does not fall into a state of nature. The argument that less governance is good governance is a slippery slope one, since it is hard to determine where the cut off should be; should it be drugs, should be weapons, what can you trade volutarily? On the other hand, government is/should be a reflection of its polity. I would argue that the majority populace in the US would still agree with the notion that 'drugs should be banned', 'prostitution is illegal' (voluntary economic transactions between two individuals). I, like yourself, do not agree with this view but the puritanical hangover that still afflicts the political base causes the government, and the its operators, to make such laws. So it is more of a reflection of our society than anything else.