Page 2 of 2
Jury foreman Greg Thompson, 52, said that at times he was the only holdout for Oracle on that fair use copyright question. When the jury finally declared itself deadlocked, the final vote count was 9-3 in favor of Google, Thompson said.
According to Thompson, a retirement plan specialist, one of the other jurors used a food analogy to describe Oracle's evidence.
"He said he was waiting for the steak, and all he got was the parsley," Thompson said, adding that in his opinion, Google's arguments in favor of open software collaboration swayed more tech savvy jurors.
All the other jurors filed past reporters outside the courtroom and declined to comment.
Walker said he was briefing a group of Google engineers about the company's legal issues when news of the verdict came in. "There was a real round of applause," he said.
While Oracle is seeking about $1 billion in copyright damages, the patent damages in play were much lower.
In the event it lost on patent liability, Google offered to pay Oracle roughly $2.8 million in damages on the two patents remaining in the case, covering the period through 2011, according to a filing made jointly by the companies before trial.
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 proposal.
During trial, Judge Alsup revealed that Android generated roughly $97.7 million in revenue during the first quarter of 2010.
Shares in Oracle closed 1.2 percent higher at $26.68. Google stock was up 1.4 percent at $609.46.
Colleen Chien, a professor at Santa Clara Law in Silicon Valley, said the result shows the risks of IP litigation.
"Oracle came in this thinking it was going to win billions, now it will probably walk away losing millions in legal fees," Chien said.
The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, is Oracle America, Inc v. Google Inc, 10-3561.