Jury orders SAP to pay Oracle 1.3 billion dollars

Nov 23, 2010 by Glenn Chapman
The logo of German professional software giant SAP. A US jury has ordered the firm to pay US rival Oracle 1.3 billion dollars in damages in a record-setting copyright infringement award.

A US jury has ordered German business software giant SAP to pay US rival Oracle 1.3 billion dollars in damages in a record-setting copyright infringement award.

"We're ecstatic," said Geoffrey Howard, a partner with the Bingham McCutchen law firm, a member of the Oracle trial team. "The jury recognized the value of the intellectual property stolen by SAP."

Oracle attorneys called the copyright damages award the highest ever and hailed the verdict as a resounding warning that stealing intellectual property from technology companies will not be tolerated.

SAP subsidiary TomorrowNow recovered and copied massive amounts of Oracle software and confidential data by posing as clients, according to court documents.

A customized software tool dubbed "Titan" was allegedly used to plunder Oracle's website of patches, updates, fixes and other programs crafted for Oracle's paying customers.

SAP admitted to the copyright infringement in legal "stipulations" that cleared the way for a jury trial regarding how much should be paid to Oracle in damages.

"SAP wanted to take responsibility," Oracle attorney David Boies said after the jury revealed its decision. "They now have the opportunity to do that and move on."

During closing arguments in the case being held in a federal court here, SAP attorney Robert Mittelstaedt conceded the copyright infringement by SAP and focused on minimizing any damage award.

"I'm not proud of this and SAP is not proud of this," Mittelstaedt said.

SAP will study its legal options before deciding whether to appeal the verdict or petition the judge to reduce the amount, a company spokesman told AFP in the courtroom.

SAP was interested in putting the unflattering case behind it, he added.

"We are, of course, disappointed by this verdict and will pursue all available options, including post-trial motions and appeal if necessary," head of SAP Americas media relations Jim Dever said in an emailed statement.

"This will unfortunately be a prolonged process and we continue to hope that the matter can be resolved appropriately without more years of litigation."

SAP could negotiate with Oracle to agree on a reduced settlement payout in exchange for not appealing the verdict.

Jurors interviewed after the verdict said that deliberations focused on how much SAP might have had to pay if it began licensing Oracle's copyrighted technology in 2005 instead of swiping it.

Award amounts discussed by the jury ranged from 519 million dollars to three billion dollars, according to the jury foreman, who declined to give his name.

"You have something and someone takes it and uses it, they've got to pay," said juror Joe Bangay, a 57-year-old auto body worker.

Jurors were convinced that top SAP executives were aware of what was taking place "every step of the way," according to the foreman.

He doubted that testimony by former SAP chief executive Leo Apotheker would have changed the outcome of deliberations.

Apotheker avoided efforts by Oracle's trial team to serve him a subpoena that would have compelled him to testify at trial.

Apotheker was recently hired by US computer giant Hewlett-Packard (HP) to replace Mark Hurd as chief executive, but HP refused to help track the former SAP boss down for the trial.

Apotheker was on the SAP board that unanimously approved a deal to buy US technology firm TomorrowNow, which copied massive amounts of Oracle software and confidential data by posing as clients.

No matter what amount SAP winds up paying Oracle, the case threatens to cost the German firm its reputation as a trusted vendor of business software.

"This will cost SAP moving forward," said analyst Rebecca Wettemann of Nucleus Research. "Oracle is going to be asking whether you want to buy from an innovator or someone who is stealing others' innovations."

Explore further: Judge approves $450 mn deal in Apple ebook suit

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

SAP won't fight Oracle claims in espionage case

Aug 06, 2010

(AP) -- In a surprise twist in a corporate espionage case involving two of the world's biggest business software makers, SAP AG on Thursday said it won't fight claims that a subsidiary stole valuable data from rival Oracle ...

Ellison: Oracle has $4 billion case against SAP

Nov 08, 2010

(AP) -- Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison turned up the pressure in an industrial espionage trial Monday by testifying that archenemy SAP AG should have paid $4 billion for licenses to Oracle software.

Recommended for you

Dish restores Turner channels to lineup

Nov 21, 2014

Turner Broadcasting channels such as Cartoon Network and CNN are back on the Dish network after being dropped from the satellite TV provider's lineup during contract talks.

'Call of Duty' blasts past $10 bn in sales

Nov 20, 2014

Blockbuster military shooter video game "Call of Duty" has blasted past $10 billion in lifetime sales, propelled by demand for the latest installment in the 11-year-old franchise.

Square's point-of-sale service goes global

Nov 20, 2014

Financial services startup Square is taking aim at cash registers across the globe, making its point-of-sale software available internationally in English, Spanish, French and Japanese.

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

tarheelchief
not rated yet Nov 25, 2010
It's difficult to enforce a decision in our own nation.Let us see if German corporations will help SAP fund their own suits against American thefts.This may become interesting because many German patents were taken during WWI and WWII.
I am not sure if modern technology allows all the definitions to cross national lines. In particular the Chinese and Indians will watch how this decision plays out,for they have lifted many patents wholesale.Singapore used their court system to bring corporations toward their nation's goals.The WTO may intervene in this matter,and help Oracle,or worse may decide the US Courts do not have jurisdiction in this dispute.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.