German software giant SAP conceded Thursday that it allowed or even contributed to a subsidiary’s effort to pirate software from archrival Oracle, while SAP lawyers renewed their complaint to a judge that Oracle is turning the case into a “sideshow” and “media circus.”
Redwood City-based Oracle hailed the concession as a significant development, as both sides gear up for a civil trial next week in Oakland federal court. SAP said it was attempting to narrow the focus of the trial, but Oracle attorneys said they will oppose SAP’s move to limit testimony about SAP executives’ role in the case.
In a series of public statements, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison has vowed that the trial would implicate current and former top SAP executives, particularly ex-SAP chief Léo Apotheker, who was recently named CEO of Hewlett-Packard. Ellison also criticized HP after its officials insisted Apotheker had minimal involvement in the case.
SAP has previously said its TomorrowNow subsidiary carried out a pirating scheme without the parent company’s knowledge or approval. Oracle has argued that SAP’s top management knew and encouraged TomorrowNow to operate on a business model that depended on downloading and using Oracle’s copyrighted material without paying for it.
“SAP management has insisted for 31/2 years of litigation that it knew nothing about SAP’s own massive theft of Oracle’s intellectual property. Today, SAP has finally confessed it knew about the theft all along,” Oracle spokeswoman Deborah Hellinger said Thursday.
But attorneys for SAP presented the move as an attempt to keep the trial focused on how much compensation SAP should pay. Oracle is claiming more than $2 billion, while SAP has said it should be in the “tens of millions.”
In a court filing, SAP attorney Tharan Lanier said the company won’t contest that it “materially contributed” to the violations, or that it “reasonably should have known” about the abuses and failed to take steps to prevent them. An SAP spokesman declined to elaborate.
Lanier argued that SAP’s concession eliminates the need for testimony about the parent company or its executives, which he said threatens to make the trial “a media circus.” He added: “Keeping the issue in the case would only satisfy plaintiffs’ desire to turn the upcoming trial into a sideshow, focused on people and companies who are not even parties to this dispute.”
Complaining about what he called Ellison’s “obsession” with Apotheker and HP, which is not involved in the case, Lanier added: “Oracle plainly intends to use weeks of trial to harass its competitors.”
In a separate filing, Oracle attorney Geoffrey Howard argued that the role of the parent company is key to its financial liability. Trial is scheduled to start Monday, but Howard asked U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton for a delay until Thursday so Oracle can revise its case in light of SAP’s concession.
Contact Brandon Bailey at 408-920-5022; follow him at Twitter.com/BrandonBailey.