Day 2 of the Hewlett-Packard vs. Oracle lawsuit in California state Superior Court in San Jose, Calif., June 5brought forth more testimony from HP’s then-head of enterprisebusiness, board of directors member Ann Livermore. The issue at hand is this: Did Oracle violate contract agreementswhen it decided to stop making new versions of database softwarefor Intel’s Itanium processors that HP uses in its servers? HPthinks so and is asking for damages totaling about $4 billion. Santa Clara Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg will decide thefirst phase of the trial on his own. Phase 1 will focusspecifically on whether there is a viable contract between HP andOracle. Tank Rotator
If Judge Kleinberg decides the original contract stands, ajury then will decide whether Oracle violated the contract, andfigure out what damages are due. On June 5, Livermore described in detail the negotiations that tookplace between Oracle Co-President Safra Catz and her regarding asettlement agreement involving the 2010 move of former HP CEO MarkHurd to Oracle to be co-president with Catz. In particular,Livermore explained that the language grew out of both companies’desire to preserve their relationship and to continue to worktogether as they had before. After Hurd joined Oracle in late 2010, HP became concerned,Livermore said in Day 1 testimony. “I was concerned that Markwas leaving HP with ill will toward HP. China Concrete Cut Saw
My concern was that he knewour financials. He also knew our dependence on Itanium; he knewlots and lots of things,” Livermore said. It was made clear that the HP-Oracle relationship was founded onOracle porting its software to HP servers ssentially without anywritten agreements and without any payments between the parties.Oracle continues to rely on the four contracts that existed overthe course of the parties’ 25-year relationship, Livermore said. HP contends that this is a miniscule number when compared with thehundreds of instances in which Oracle ported its software to HPservers without a contract and without charge. Tank Rotator Manufacturer
Livermore also said that it was fiction that Oracle decided to stopdeveloping software for the Itanium microprocessor because itallegedly was nearing the end of its life. Livermore explained thatOracle’s position was baseless because the HP-UX/Itanium platformcomprised about one-third of the high-end Unix market, wasextremely profitable for HP, and that HP’s road map and itsagreements with Intel extended the life of the Itanium road maptoward the end of this decade. Oracle, in its opening statement on June 4, argued that HP’sactions immediately following the announcement proved that HP didnot believe that Oracle had agreed to port its software to HP’sItanium-based servers. Livermore testified, however, that immediately after she learnedabout Oracle’s announcement that said it would no longer developits software for Itanium servers, she called Catz to express heroutrage over the announcement and that she informed Catz thatOracle had breached the settlement agreement signed by the partiesjust six months earlier. Oracle has posted documents relating to the case here.
They are regularly updated. The expected schedule for next two days (this is subject tochange): Wednesday, June 6: Mike Holston, HP’s former general counsel, testifies: DavidTucker, an HP software engineer, testifies (if time permits);Holston will testify on topics relating to the Mark Hurd lawsuit,the negotiation of the contract at issue and related matters.Tucker will testify about the parties’ course of dealing regardingthe porting of Oracle software to HP’s Itanium-based servers. Thursday, June 7: Conclude Tucker (if necessary), conclude Ann Livermore, call TimAylott (if time permits).