SAP willing to pay Oracle $120M for attorney's fees

In exchange, Oracle will drop its punitive damages claims in the TomorrowNow lawsuit

SAP would pay Oracle $US120 million for "past and future reasonable attorneys fees and costs" under the terms of a joint stipulation filed Monday in connection with the companies' ongoing intellectual-property lawsuit.

Oracle sued SAP in 2007, alleging that its TomorrowNow subsidiary illegally downloaded Oracle software and support materials in order to lure away Oracle customers.

Under the agreement filed Monday, TomorrowNow "stipulates to entry of judgment on Oracle's claims for violations of the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and California's Computer Data Access and Fraud Act, breach of contract, intentional interference, negligent interference, unfair competition, trespass to chattels, unjust enrichment/restitution and an accounting."

In turn, Oracle will not seek punitive damages against TomorrowNow or SAP, according to the filing in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

The jury in the case, which went to trial this week, will be instructed to consider "only those damages available under the Copyright Act," it adds.

SAP must pay Oracle the $120 million by Nov. 9.

The agreement's terms are not binding until the court approves it, and either SAP or Oracle can withdraw entirely if any provisions are not accepted, it states.

Last week, SAP said it wouldn't contest the issue of "contributory infringement" -- or whether its executives knew about the software theft. The move meant the trial will hinge on damages owed to Oracle.

Oracle has pegged its total damages at north of $2 billion, while SAP had maintained they should be in the tens of millions. SAP is now poised to give Oracle far more than that sum even before the question of damages for copyright infringement is answered, despite the elimination of punitive damages.

Spokespersons for SAP and Oracle declined to comment on the stipulation.

Opening statements in the case begin today.

James Niccolai of IDG News Service contributed to this story.

Chris Kanaracus covers enterprise software and general technology breaking news for The IDG News Service. Chris's e-mail address is Chris_Kanaracus@idg.com

Tags business issuesservicesapplicationsintellectual propertylegalCivil lawsuitsSAPsoftwareOracle

Keep up with the latest tech news, reviews and previews by subscribing to the Good Gear Guide newsletter.

Chris Kanaracus

IDG News Service

Comments

Comments are now closed.

Latest News Articles

Most Popular Articles

Follow Us

GGG Evaluation Team

Kathy Cassidy

STYLISTIC Q702

First impression on unpacking the Q702 test unit was the solid feel and clean, minimalist styling.

Anthony Grifoni

STYLISTIC Q572

For work use, Microsoft Word and Excel programs pre-installed on the device are adequate for preparing short documents.

Steph Mundell

LIFEBOOK UH574

The Fujitsu LifeBook UH574 allowed for great mobility without being obnoxiously heavy or clunky. Its twelve hours of battery life did not disappoint.

Andrew Mitsi

STYLISTIC Q702

The screen was particularly good. It is bright and visible from most angles, however heat is an issue, particularly around the Windows button on the front, and on the back where the battery housing is located.

Simon Harriott

STYLISTIC Q702

My first impression after unboxing the Q702 is that it is a nice looking unit. Styling is somewhat minimalist but very effective. The tablet part, once detached, has a nice weight, and no buttons or switches are located in awkward or intrusive positions.

Resources

Best Deals on GoodGearGuide

Latest Jobs

Don’t have an account? Sign up here

Don't have an account? Sign up now

Forgot password?