They will return to the courthouse on Monday to hear closing arguments from both sides and will then begin deliberations.
They can either find that Google is liable for copyright violation or that the company's use of 37 APIs from Java is covered under the fair use provisions of US copyright law. If they come to the former conclusion, then only will a new phase of the trial commence, to determine damages to be paid to Oracle.
Oracle took Google to court in 2010, seeking damages for what it said was copyright and patent violation. The trial ended overwhelmingly in favour of Google in 2012, with the presiding judge, Justice William Alsup, ruling that APIs were not copyrightable. This was overturned in a subsequent appeal by Oracle and the ongoing trial is solely to determine whether Oracle is entitled to damages or not.
Oracle lawyer Peter Bicks asked Page whether Google had paid for the use of Java, to which Page responded: "I think when Sun established Java it was established as an open source thing."
When Bicks repeated the question, Page's response was, "No we didn't pay for the free and open things."
Some of the evidence presented was noteworthy, as when Dr Greg Leonard, an economist put up by Google, claimed that Android had no impact on the licensing market for Java. The same witness testified that Google could well have developed Android without copying any code from Java at all.