SAP has no interest in paying interest to Oracle

SAP says Oracle's $1.3 billion judgment in the TomorrowNow case is enough.

SAP is fighting back against Oracle's demand it fork over US$212 million in interest on top of a $1.3 billlion sum a jury awarded Oracle last month in its corporate-theft suit against the German software vendor, according to a court filing last week.

Oracle sued SAP in 2007 over illegal downloads the company's former subsidiary, TomorrowNow, made in the course of delivering reduced-price service to Oracle software customers. SAP has accepted liability for TomorrowNow's actions, but called the award's size unreasonable and so far, hasn't ruled out an appeal.

The judgment was based on "hypothetical" fees that SAP would have had to pay if it licensed Oracle's software legally. Oracle wants interest on the $1.3 billion dating as far back as Jan. 2005.

"The jury's award, if it stands, more than adequately accomplishes the goals of the Copyright Act, as it at least fully compensates, and, really, overcompensates Oracle (particularly considering that by receiving its money today, Oracle completely avoided the economic collapse of 2007," SAP's Dec. 23 filing in US District Court for the Northern District of California states.

SAP's filing also took issue with the calculation method used by Oracle's expert witness to determine the interest amount.

"If the Court were to choose to award interest ... it should, like so many other courts, follow 28 U.S.C. § 1961 and award interest at a flat rate equal to the weekly average 1-year constant maturity Treasury yield (which is currently .30%), compounded annually."

By this method, Oracle's pre-judgment interest on the $1.3 billion dating back to Jan. 19, 2005 -- the day SAP announced it had bought TomorrowNow --would amount only to about $22.7 million through Dec. 23, according to SAP.

An Oracle spokeswoman did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday.

Tags SAPOracle

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.

Most Popular Reviews

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.

Latest News Articles

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?