Google Logo

In compliance with the order of presiding justice William Alsup, Google Inc (NASDAQ:GOOG) submitted a list of names of individuals and entities who wrote about its patent infringement case against Oracle Corporation (NASDAQ:ORCL), but the search engine giant maintained its position that it did not pay anyone to comment on the issue.

The search engine giant submitted the names of seven individuals and six organizations, who wrote about the case including Google Inc (NASDAQ:GOOG) attorney William Patry, Stanford Law Professor mark Lemley, Java creator James Gosling, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), Public Knowledge, Center for Democracy and Technology, etc.  Google said those included in its filing were commended about the patent case were known by the company to “have received payments as consultants, contractors, vendors, or employees and employee-commenters at organizations who receive money from Google.”

Google Inc (NASDAQ:GOOG) reiterated that it did not pay the entities to comment on its patent infringement case against Oracle Corporation (NASDAQ:ORCL).  The company also said its rival falsely accused the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), and Jonathan Band of writing a column regarding his opinion that the API’s are not copyrightable under the influence Google money. In its filing Google Inc (NASDAQ:GOOG) pointed out the public statements of Black that “Google did not ask him to write in support to its position.”

A blog from DailyTech cited Google’s relationship with Prof. Lemley as quite disturbing, because he is not a patent expert, but he published journal papers against the existing patent law.

Earlier in August Judge Alsup ordered Google and Oracle to disclose the names of journalists paid by the companies to cover the case. Alsup explained the court’s concern on the possibility that the comments written by bloggers, journalists, or internet authors were influenced by their financial relationship with the companies. The disclosure does not include advertising revenue, experts, or gifts to universities.

Both parties responded. Oracle Corporation (NASDAQ:ORCL) admitted hiring Florian Mueller from FOSS Patents to serve as a consultant on “competition related matters”, and some of its employees may have written blogs regarding the case voluntarily. Oracle Corporation (NASDAQ:ORCL) did not instruct its employees to publish their comments about the case. On the other hand, Google said it did not pay anyone to write about its patent battle with Oracle. The search engine giant said it is impossible for the company to identify any individual or organization, because most bloggers generate revenue from Google Adsense and the company provides funding to contractors, non-profit organizations, public policy groups, and universities.

Judge Alsup said Google failed to satisfy the court’s order and gave the search engine giant an extra day to comply.  He emphasized the court’s intention is “to bring to light authors whose statements about the issues in the case might have been influenced by the receipt of money from Google Inc (NASDAQ:GOOG) or Oracle Corporation (NASDAQ:ORCL).”

In 2012, Oracle Corporation (NASDAQ:ORCL) filed a complaint against Google Inc (NASDAQ:GOOG), claiming the android mobile operating technology infringed its Java patents.