The Google CEO spent nearly an hour in a federal courtroom Wednesday deflecting questions about his role in a copyright dispute over some of the technology in his company's Android software for smartphones.
The taciturn man often looked uncomfortable on the witness stand as he sparred with tenacious copyright lawyer who made headlines for grilling former Microsoft Corp. CEO in an antitrust lawsuit filed by the U.S. government in 1990s.
In this trial, the lawyer is working for business software maker Oracle Corp., which accused Google Inc. of building its Android software by stealing pieces of the technology from Java, a programming platform that Oracle now owns.
Oracle, which is based in Redwood Shores, California, is seeking hundreds of millions in damages and royalties for Google's future use of Android, which powers more than 300 million smartphones and tablet computers.
In a measure of the trial's high stakes, Oracle has already called two multibillionaire executives to the witness stand. Oracle's own CEO, appeared Tuesday, as did Google's for a brief round of questioning before his Wednesday return for more extensive interrogations. In both appearances, Google's CEO sported a suit and tie, a departure from the casual attire he wears around Google's Mountain View, California headquarters.
He looked like he wished he could have stayed in Mountain View Wednesday. During his time on the stand, he rarely looked at the lawyer and frequently said he couldn't remember seeing some of the internal Google documents that Oracle is using to build its case.
The Google CEO's foggy memory seemed to exasperate the lawyer, perhaps because the haze may have worked to Google's advantage.
The lawyer's attempts to display exhibits containing inside information about Google were blocked by the U.S. District Judge because Google's CEO couldn't recall seeing them. Although it's unclear what was in the exhibits, it was clear Google's own lawyers didn't want the contents to be exposed in a public courtroom.
Some of the evidence currently being kept under court seal is believed to include disclosures about how much money Google has made from Android since the software hit the market in 2008 -- a financial nugget that Google has never revealed.
Although Google gives away the software to mobile device makers, Android brings in revenue from digital advertising and sales of mobile applications that run on the system.
The lawyer spent much of his interrogation trying to prove the CEO and other Google executives realized that the company probably would have to pay a licensing fee to use elements of Java as far back as 2005. That's when the CEO orchestrated the deal to buy the Silicon Valley startup that hatched Android and brought in the Android founder to oversee an effort to make Google's online search engine, advertising and other services more accessible on mobile phones.
When shown emails from the Android founder and others mentioning the need to license some of Java during 2005 and 2006, the Google CEO linked the references to Google's attempts to build Android in a partnership with Sun Microsystems Inc., Java's owner at that time. Oracle entered the picture in 2010 when it bought Sun Microsystems for $7.3 billion.
He later elaborated on Google's discussions with Sun while he was under more cordial questioning from one of his company's lawyers.
Oracle's case hinges on whether Android infringes on 37 copyrights for "application programming interfaces," or APIs, that provide the blueprints for making much of Java work effectively. Other major companies, including IBM Corp, have licensed some of Java's APIs, but Google hasn't -- one of the few things that the lawyer was able to get the Google CEO to confirm during his testimony Wednesday.
Google contends the Java APIs aren't covered under U.S. copyright law because they aren't a form of creative expression.
But various Google emails presented in the trial so far have included internal recommendations to work out a license for some elements of Java. One August 2010 email from a Google engineer to the Android founder mentions being asked by the CEO and Google's other co-founder to review possible alternatives to Java.
When the lawyer asked about an email in Wednesday, the Google CEO wouldn't acknowledge telling anyone to look into the issue, let along knowing him.
In an apparent attempt to cast Google's stance on Java as hypocritical, the lawyer asked the CEO if his company copyrighted the APIs that run its services. He responded by saying that he thought things were just copyrighted by default.
The lawyer then asked him if Google might use copyrights to prevent an outsider from improperly using its technology. He responded by saying that Google is a company based on intellectual property, and that's one of the major intellectual property protections.
The Google CEO left the courtroom smiling, but still didn't look completely relaxed. Maybe that's because the judge told him that Oracle would probably call him back to testify before the trial is over.
For more national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
