Quick refresher, as this case has been going on for a very, very long time: way back in the late 90′s, TomorrowNow started as a company that specialized in upgrading and providing technical services to PeopleSoft systems. In 2002 they branched out to provide third party support for various kinds of enterprise software, including both PeopleSoft and JD Edwards. TomorrowNow was purchased by SAP in 2005; PeopleSoft was purchased by Oracle the same year.

In 2007, Oracle slapped SAP with a lawsuit accusing them of “corporate theft on a grand scale” due to TomorrowNow having downloaded thousands of documents and programs from Oracle’s Customer Connection technical support website using logins of Oracle customers whose support contracts had either already expired or were about to.

SAP briefly tried to argue that TomorrowNow had been entitled to download the materials as they had been contracted to perform third party support; that didn’t last long. In the end, it came down to TomorrowNow being pretty obviously in the wrong and the only question being how many millions were owed to Oracle– Oracle claimed it was billions, not millions, using the argument that each of the clients who employed TomorrowNow’s services would otherwise have employed Oracle Support. At one point, a judge awarded Oracle $1.3 billion, but another judge threw that verdict out.

That Oracle would get a quick admission of guilt and willingness to bargain was not at all a forgone conclusion. To see a very different outcome, take a look Oracle’s lawsuit on another third party support firm, Rimini Street. Interesting side note: Rimini Street CEO Seth Ravin was a founder of TomorrowNow. Hmmmm.

SAP has agreed to pay the $306 million, hoping to avoid yet another trial. Oracle says that agreement only paves the way for an appeal. What do we here at Eye on Oracle have to say about this decision? Well, At least Oracle’s winnings come close to matching their losses in the HP trial. At this rate, they might just break even…

According to the claims, Sun Microsystems paid kickbacks to Accenture to recommend that federal agencies buy Sun products. The years in question were 1998 to 2006. Just as important: Sun wasn’t the only one. Six other companies, including Hewlett-Packard Co., have settled similar charges.

So for many years, kickbacks from big IT vendors were a pervasive tactic in the IT industry.

Accenture, of course, is one of the largest IT consulting businesses out there. So this draws into question just about any IT consultant. I’m not knocking IT consultants. Many of them provide very valuable services to companies with limited IT staffs.

But if you’re not doing your own due diligence and are relying blindly on the recommendation of a consultant, you are putting your own organization at risk of being exploited like this. And chances are you don’t have the brawn of the Justice Department behind you to recoup any losses.

DRAM from Micron

Oracle has sued memory manufacturer Micron Technology, Inc., a federal lawsuit that looks like a money grab for transgressions that happened 10 years ago.

The lawsuit, filed on Friday, aims to “recover damages caused by a long-standing conspiracy among manufacturers of dynamic random access memory (DRAM) computer chips.” In addition to Micron those conspirators, according to Oracle and based off a federal Department of Justice investigation, include Hynix Semiconductor, Infineon Technologies, Elpida Memory and Samsung. It is unclear why Oracle is only suing Micron right now.

In the lawsuit, Oracle refers to these companies as “the DRAM cartel.”

The DOJ found that the companies, which accounted for about three-quarters of DRAM manufacturing in 2000, engaged in price fixing to close off the market and overcharge customers. Oracle is claiming that between 1998 and 2002, Sun bought more than $2 billion worth of DRAM at inflated prices for use in its servers and workstations.

The DOJ investigation wrapped up in 2006 and led to billions in fines for the companies, and even imprisonment for some.

Now as for Oracle’s reason for bringing the lawsuit:

“Oracle, as successor in interest to Sun, has standing to bring this action, because Sun purchased DRAM from Micron and its co-conspirators during the Conspiracy Period. In doing so, Sun was injured by Micron’s and it’s co-conspirators’ unlawful actions, because it paid more for DRAM than it otherwise would have, as described more fully above. These higher prices caused Sun to lose money and customers, who could not afford to purchase Sun’s products containing artificially high-priced DRAM.”

Though Oracle might have a legal argument here, the logical idea of it seems far-fetched. When Oracle acquired Sun, it paid $7.4 billion, or $9.50 per share. Back in the early 2000s, Sun stock was going for north of $200 per share.

So now Oracle is suing Micron for causing Sun to lose money and customers, which eventually led to its stock being cheap enough so that Oracle could buy Sun. Right?

Shouldn’t Oracle be thanking Micron here?