[pjmlp]

What contradiction?

Google should have paid Sun instead of playing a Microsoft's move fostering Sun's downfall, period.

And in doing so, Android would have been JavaSE compliant plus whatever additional libraries they would think to drop on top of it.

[onli]

How do you come to the idea that having more Java devices available, even if not 100% compatible, would have in any way caused harm to Sun? And then even that much that it killed the company?

On top of that, I don't see for what google would have had an obligation to pay.

Contradiction: Google broke some imaginary copyright by re-implementing APIs, but Google is bad because the re-implementation was not 100% equal to the original causing fragmentation. Either the fragmentation was harmful, then the API copyright was the problem. Or the API copyright violation was the problem, then fragmentation was the explicit goal and Google's try to minimize it the problem. Both can't be true at the same time outside lawyer lala land.

[pjmlp]

Because those devices run Android Java, which Sun saw $0, thus not able to capitalize on it to pay their bills.

1 - Google did not pay for Java licenses, when it should. Even Andy Rubin admits that on his emails.

2 - To this day Android is not Java SE compliant, thus creating a fragmentation between Android Java and Java. Just like Sun managed to prevent with J++

3 - Being a Java license as Google avoided to be, and still isn't (many Java APIs are not yet available on Android), would have required Android to be fully Java SE compliant

So to conclude, Google tricked Sun and fragmented the Java eco-system.

They should pay and provide a 100% Java SE compliant implementation, or be honest about it and fully migrate to Kotlin, Dart or whatever they feel like it.