I would say “case closed”, but we all know how much Google loves the word “open” — they’re asking for a mistrial. 

Seriously though, this sounds like a mixed bag. A loss for Google, but not a full loss. This is probably going to take several more weeks/months to fully play out.

More interesting is the macro picture. This is yet another headache surrounding Android, the “free” and “open” OS which has now been found to be infringing on someone else’s copyrights and which the majority of the big OEMs pay a licensing fee to Microsoft — not Google — to use. 

Java creator James Gosling on Oracle v. Google:

Just because Sun didn’t have patent suits in our genetic code doesn’t mean we didn’t feel wronged. While I have differences with Oracle, in this case they are in the right. Google totally slimed Sun.

Ouch.

Dan Farber:

The smoking gun as it relates the API copyright issue came in a March 24, 2006 email in which Rubin said he didn’t see how Google could open Java without Sun since Sun’s owns the intellectual property and the brand.

Maybe Google just retroactively open sourced code they didn’t actually have the right to? Makes total sense. “Open” knows no bounds!

Maybe someone should copy Google’s search algorithms and open source them. Google probably has some IP there, but, you know, whatevs. 

Dan Levine for Reuters:

For future damages, Google proposed paying Oracle 0.5 percent of Android revenue on one patent until it expires this December and 0.015 percent on a second patent until it expires in April 2018.

Oracle rejected the offer for being too low, but it’s interesting that Google (if found to be infringing on Oracle’s patents) was willing to pay a percentage of all the revenue they make from Android. This would have continued the trend of the mobile OS being a nice little business for everyone not named Google. 

For Google itself? It sure looks like a pretty poor little business given the resources they pour into it.