2010年11月22日星期一

Oracle-SAP Case Closes With $1.67 Billion Difference of Opinion

Closing arguments in the Oracle vs. SAP trial went about as expected, with Oracle attorney David Boies urging the jury to drop the hammer on SAP by awarding $1.7 billion in damages for infringement of intellectual property, and SAP attorney Robert Mittelstaedt arguing that to do so would be asinine.

“The defendants have admitted that their infringement was massive and prolonged,” Boies said in his closing statement. “It is clear that SAP’s board and top executives expected it would be worth billions of dollars.” And just because SAP wasn’t able to generate that kind of value from Oracle’s pilfered IP, doesn’t mean it shouldn’t pay full fare for its infringement. “They took it and they have to pay for it regardless of whether they did well or didn’t do well using it.”

But SAP would rather not pay what it describes as a poorly caluclated “bonanza” award. “This case comes down to what is the best measure of compensation,” SAP attorney Robert Mittelstaedt argued. “Oracle’s [proposed damages] are based on guesswork,” while SAP’s are “based on reality.”

And evidently factoring “reality” into the equation cuts a hell of a lot of fat off the damages award at issue here. Because Mittelstaedt says SAP feels it owes Oracle just $28 million, which is, remarkably, even less than the $40.6 million its high-paid damages expert suggested.

PREVIOUSLY:

没有评论:

发表评论