I don't know, but if so, is that relevant? The question was whether or not it was a good deal for Google. It's not zero-sum.
Your argument was it was a good expense because it is popular, yet an uninvolved company is making more, so perhaps the purchase was unnecessary.
How Microsoft made money from Android is quite interesting, and very ORACLE-like: Microsoft went around threatening OEM companies to pay up for a bag of patents it claimed Android infringed, but wouldn't publicly disclose which patents those were. Meaning OEMs couldn't create work-arounds. The mobile IP-wars were something.