Google may have much more to lose in its other markets around the world than it has to gain by remaining in China, says a Duke University expert on the technology giant's threat to pull out of the country because of government censorship.

"Google's most valuable asset is not its famed search algorithm, or all of the physical servers and infrastructure it owns. Rather, it is its ‘reputational capital,'" says Wayne Norman, a professor at Duke's Kenan Institute for Ethics who specializes in business ethics.

As with many business decisions by a company that lives or dies on its reputation, these latest moves by Google appear to be motivated by a complex mixture of strategic and ethical considerations, Norman says.

"Like an accounting firm, they rely on reputation and trust and, in particular, on the trust and affiliation of a potentially fickle set of stakeholders: namely, the users of their search engine, Gmail, Blogspot blogs and other products. These people don't pay a dime to use Google, and if they no longer trust Google's ability to protect the privacy of their data and information -- or even if they just come to think of Google as being as uncool as Microsoft -- they can move easily to a rival's free service."

Norman says Google "takes very seriously -- even personally" -- what it believes is the Chinese government's attempt to breach the security of its users' information.

"For one thing, this may make Google look vulnerable to hackers in general, and thus unreliable for users with sensitive data. Secondly, Google's officials and advisers who know China well may see it as a kind of insult, or test of strength, and an attempt to make Google lose ‘face.'

"Google may feel there is no choice but to show a response of toughness to save face. But in openly flouting its ‘self-censorship' part of the initial bargain, the company is also inviting the Chinese to shut them down. They are, in fact, clearly willing to be shut down in this way."