Google Twists the Knife, Asks For Sanctions Against Oracle Attorney (arstechnica.com)

Google isn't done with its victory over Oracle. Court filings suggest that Google will be filing a motion for sanctions against Oracle and its law firm, Orrick, Sutcliffe & Herrington. The Mountain View-based company is apparently irked that Oracle attorney disclosed the financial agreements between Google and Apple. From an Ars Technica report: Speaking in open court, Oracle attorney Annette Hurst said that Google's Android operating system had generated revenue of $31 billion and $22 billion in profit. She also disclosed that Google pays Apple $1 billion to keep Google's search bar on iPhones. "Look at the extraordinary magnitude of commerciality here," Hurst told a magistrate judge as she discussed the revenue figures. The $1 billion figure comes from a revenue-split that gives Apple a portion of the money that Google makes off searches that originate on iPhones. The revenue share figure was 34 percent, "at one point in time," according to Hurst. Google lawyers asked for the figure to be struck from the record. "That percentage just stated, that should be sealed," Google lawyer Robert Van Nest said, according to a transcript of the hearing. "We are talking hypotheticals here. That's not a publicly known number."

Comments

Re:Oracle sells software, Google sells privacy

[HiThere]

Google sells access to your privacy. It's against their business model to actually sell the information about you, instead what they sell is access to a demographic that includes you.

Thus: In *this* aspect Oracle is the evil party...though not because they sell software and hardware, but rather because they are trying to monetize APIs. (There are other reasons, but less related to this case.)

Re:Oracle sells software, Google sells privacy

[HiThere]

Assuming you're not a troll:
The don't sell information on you, or information about you. The let people buy ads that will be shown to a defined demographic. Who is in that demographic is a company confidential secret.

If they sold information about who was in the demographic, others could place ads without paying them. So they keep it a secret. But they look for ways to place ads where they can act as a middleman, because that lets them maximize their profit.

P.S.: This information is around a decade old now, but I've seen no indication that anything about it has changed.