Google discloses relationships with journalists, bloggers

Google's final disclosure of paid relationships is short and relatively benign
Nevertheless, Google did end up disclosing more writers than Oracle.

After disclosing a whopping zero paid relationships between the company and "authors, journalists, commentators, or bloggers" surrounding the Oracle/Google patent fight, Google has changed its mind and submitted a second filing – after Judge William Alsup's August 20 critique that Google "failed to comply" with his original order to do so.

The result?

Google's found a number of consultants, contractors, vendors, and other employees who receive money from Google or whose organizations receive Google funds – not advertising revenue, we note – and who made some kind of public commentary surrounding Oracle's claims that Google infringed its patents within its Android operating system.

However, Google maintains that, "neither it nor its counsel has paid an author, journalist, commentator or blogger to report or comment on any issues in this case," as reads today's filing by the company.

So who's on the list?

Google's guys and gals

Within Google's filing, the company details out six individuals who receive money from Google for their services yet, as Google notes, did not receive money from Google for any comments they made in relation to the patent case.

The list includes mention of individuals like Timothy Bray, co-inventor of XML and Android Developer Advocate, who tweeted the colorful message, "Speaking only for myself as an individual of course: F*** Oracle" (censorship ours).

And, no, Google did not quote the tweet in its entirety within its filing, tempting as the company might have been to do so.

The most interesting name found within of the filing thus far happens to be that of Stanford Law Professor Mark Lemley.

According to Google, Lemley, "serves as outside counsel to Google in unrelated cases, as does the law firm at which he is a partner."

Some pundits have suggested that the news organizations quoting Lemley in articles about the Oracle/Google case should have made mention of his relationship with Google.

Or, conversely, Lemley should have been more forthcoming about his relationship with Google during his various interviews surround the Oracle/Google case and others – including the recently decided Apple/Samsung lawsuit.

Google also calls out a number of organizations whose members, and their stances seemingly supporting Google, were already established prior to Google's relationship with the company.

In the case of the Computer and Communications Industry Association, which has frequently made known its opposition to the copyrightability of APIs, the organization originated its views before Brin and Page even wrote a single line of Google code, let alone incorporated the company.

"We frequently take positions at odds with individual members when we don't agree with their underlying policy stances," elaborated a CCIA spokesman in a statement sent to Ars Technica.

Via The Verge, Ars Technica