[Info-vax] HP wins Oracle Itanium case

[JF Mezei]

David Froble wrote:

> You seem to forget why there was an agreement for Oracle to violate.  The Hurd guy, 
> remember him?  As part of Oracle hiring him, they had to agree to certain things, to avoid 
> harm to HP.


>From what I read, the Hurd issue simply confirmed that a previous
contract was not ended. So the fine print and dots on the i would be in
the original contract, not in the Hurd agreement.

The fact that the Hurd agreement has to re-afform that contract likely
means that when HP sued Oracle about Hurd, Oracle probably threathened
to cancel that original contract. The Hurd settlement confirmed that
Oracle would not pull out of the original contract.

Now, when the time comes for damages, Oracle can likely argue that its
release of the information about the HP-Intel agreements to postpone the
death of Itanium until after Kittson did not hurt HP since HP itself had
thought that customers would find out about the EOL of Itanium by 2012.

If the drop in BCS sales was inevitable, then Oracle shouldn't be held
responsible for it.