Oracle, in its opening argument, slagged SAP as a sinister and scheming rival, claiming the company’s leadership knew it was taking a risk by buying TomorrowNow, which was found to have infringed Oracle’s intellectual property. “SAP could have chosen to compete fairly,” Oracle attorney Geoffrey Howard said. “Instead it chose to buy TomorrowNow, a company that the board of directors at SAP knew was competing unfairly. It did that because it expected to make enormous amounts of money and inflict enormous amounts of harm on Oracle by using its intellectual property.”

And SAP, in its opening argument, derided Oracle as a company deluded by its own avarice into seeking a ridiculously inflated damages award. Oracle wants “a windfall,” SAP attorney Bob Mittelstaedt told the jury. “They want a bonanza that is out of all proportion to the harm they suffered.”

According to Mittelstaedt, SAP should have to pay only for the software sales Oracle lost as a result of TomorrowNow’s malfeasance, and those number less than 500.

And that’s the point of contention around which this case will orbit. Because Oracle claims that SAP, with its acquisition of TomorrowNow, was looking for a bonanza of its own and just didn’t get it.

Memos presented by Howard on Tuesday show that SAP estimated its acquisition of TomorrowNow would disrupt Oracle’s applications business enough to cause a 10 percent decline in the company’s share price, trimming about $7 billion off its market cap.

In other words, the intent was there; the execution was just lacking. Just because SAP didn’t benefit significantly from TomorrowNow’s improper downloads of Oracle software and documentation doesn’t make those downloads any less improper.

PREVIOUSLY:

• SAP’s Tab in Oracle Case: $120 Million and Counting
• Gag Order Denied in Oracle, SAP Trial
• Ellison Taunts HP CEO a Second Time
• SAP to Ellison: Save the Drama for Your Mama
• Ellison to HP CEO: “Warrior, Come Out to Plaaeeay!
• SAP: Please Gag Oracle
• HP Scandal Sucks in New York Times Columnist Over Conflict of Interest
• Welch to HP Board: You Don’t Know Jack!
• Insiders Criticize Ellison For HP CEO Slam
• Was Apotheker HP’s First Choice of CEO?
• HP Names Ex-SAP Chief Apotheker as CEO

Under an agreement filed Monday, SAP said it is willing to pay Oracle for “past and future reasonable attorneys fees and costs” as part of a deal in which TomorrowNow would stipulate “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 exchange for the admission, Oracle would not seek additional punitive damages. The joint stipulation would need judicial approval.

Still, the real damages here are those related to copyright infringement. So while ducking punitive damages will certainly reduce SAP’s ultimate bill, it’s not likely to bring it that much closer to the “tens of millions” it contends Oracle is legitimately owed. Indeed, Oracle still has its sights firmly set on that $2 billion figure, which to be clear is copyright only. In opening arguments today, Oracle attorney Geoffrey Howard said the company will produce evidence to show SAP “expected the benefit to them and the harm to Oracle to be in the billions of dollars.”

PREVIOUSLY:

• Gag Order Denied in Oracle, SAP Trial
• Ellison Taunts HP CEO a Second Time
• SAP to Ellison: Save the Drama for Your Mama
• Ellison to HP CEO: “Warrior, Come Out to Plaaeeay!
• SAP: Please Gag Oracle
• HP Scandal Sucks in New York Times Columnist Over Conflict of Interest
• Welch to HP Board: You Don’t Know Jack!
• Insiders Criticize Ellison For HP CEO Slam
• Was Apotheker HP’s First Choice of CEO?
• HP Names Ex-SAP Chief Apotheker as CEO

[Image credit: Pre-Ellison Samurai image by Artem Mirolevioch]