Honest question. If he bought the domain from Google and the transaction went through, is that not technically a legitimate transaction and "cancelling" and refunding the money is essentially theft?
How is that any different than walking in to someone's house and leaving them $20 for the TV you took? It seems to me that "oops, take-backs" Is not a legitimate enough justification to reverse a transaction under contract law.
It seems rather ominous if even this kind of situation is permitted because it sets a precedent that corporations can simply decide to change their mind when something is not in their favor. Sure, it's an example that many people will simply rationalize or defend, but just on matters of assuring the credibility of the integrity of the whole market based system, Google should not be allowed to simply step away from this as if nothing happened without at least a fine that gets noticed by the executive suite.
How would you feel if in the future mega consolidated food corporation can arbitrarily decide that "oops, we changed our mind. That food you ate and sold to you for $X should have really been charged at $3X. Don't worry, we will charge your account. Have a nice day"
How about a different scenario; the airline industry decides that "oops, someone else was willing to pay more for that last seat on that flight you just booked. We just cancelled it and refunded your money. Have a nice day"
I get that it was probably a mistake of some kind. But what is it that immunizes corporations from the consequences of mistakes? I guess that's kind of rampant right now in our society and economy, but still.