Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was never fully dropped, just de-emphasized. Silly: Thinking that Google wants to go do evil, but needs to drop a value statement first (to do otherwise, goes against the Code of Evildoers)
Having the CEO call the idea "stupid" and removing it from the code are a bit more than de-emphasis.
Try to find a snapshot of the code that does not include it (I can only find snapshots with it, so that won't suffice as proof).
About Eric Schmidt (who I won't defend) the full quote and context ("a casual jokey interview"):
> "The idea was that we don't quite know what evil is, but if we have a rule that says don't be evil, then employees can say, I think that's evil," Schmidt said. "Now, when I showed up, I thought this was the stupidest rule ever, because there's no book about evil except maybe, you know, the Bible or something." In the end, though, he believes it has worked, by giving employees a way to point out things they find unethical.
Subtle but it is there: The former CEO does not think that doing no evil is stupid, he thinks using a rule like that, without properly defining evil was stupid. Then he changed his mind.
Compare with the JSLint license that states: "the Software shall be used for Good, not Evil." You can find that rule stupid and vague, while acting like Mother Theresa.
> "As Google (and some others) interpret it, this additional requirement constitutes a vague use restriction and thus makes the license non-free. Chris [DiBona] explained that if I were to remove that line from the license and 'return to a proper open source license that we support,' then jsmin-php could stay on Google Code.