Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Filing 793

Declaration of Chad Russell in Support of 790 Memorandum in Opposition, to Defendants' Motions in Limine filed byOracle EMEA Limited, Oracle International Corporation, Oracle USA Inc., Siebel Systems, Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I, # 10 Exhibit J, # 11 Exhibit K, # 12 Exhibit L, # 13 Exhibit M, # 14 Exhibit N, # 15 Exhibit O, # 16 Exhibit P, # 17 Exhibit Q, # 18 Exhibit R, # 19 Exhibit S, # 20 Exhibit T, # 21 Exhibit U, # 22 Exhibit V, # 23 Exhibit W, # 24 Exhibit X, # 25 Exhibit Y, # 26 Exhibit Z, # 27 Exhibit AA, # 28 Exhibit BB, # 29 Exhibit CC, # 30 Exhibit DD, # 31 Exhibit EE, # 32 Exhibit FF, # 33 Exhibit GG, # 34 Exhibit HH, # 35 Exhibit II, # 36 Exhibit JJ, # 37 Exhibit KK, # 38 Exhibit LL, # 39 Exhibit MM, # 40 Exhibit NN, # 41 Exhibit OO, # 42 Exhibit PP, # 43 Exhibit QQ, # 44 Exhibit RR, # 45 Exhibit SS, # 46 Exhibit TT)(Related document(s) 790 ) (Howard, Geoffrey) (Filed on 8/19/2010)

Oracle Corporation et al v. SAP AG et al

Doc. 793 Att. 4

EXHIBIT D (Redacted Version)
Dockets.Justia.com

LARRY ELLISON May 5, 2009 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY Page 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

ORACLE CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, ORACLE USA, INC., a Colorado corporation, and ORACLE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a California corporation, Plaintiffs, vs. SAP AG, a German corporation, SAP AMERICA, INC., a Delaware corporation, TOMORROWNOW, INC., a Texas corporation, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 07-CV-1658 (PJH)

VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF LARRY ELLISON

TUESDAY, MAY 5, 2009

HIGHLY

CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY

REPORTED BY:

HOLLY THUMAN, CSR No. 6834, RMR, CRR (1-418128)

Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

LARRY ELLISON May 5, 2009 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 10
10:37:35 10:37:35 10:37:40 10:37:42 10:37:45 10:37:48 10:37:48 10:37:51 10:37:53 10:37:54 10:37:56 10:37:59 10:38:02 10:38:04 10:38:07 10:38:12 10:38:13 10:38:16 10:38:18 10:38:20 10:38:23 10:38:26 10:38:29 10:38:31 10:38:34 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 12
10:39:49 10:39:49 10:39:50 10:39:53 10:39:56 10:39:58 10:40:03 10:40:06 10:40:09 10:40:14 10:40:17 10:40:21 10:40:25 10:40:28 10:40:31 10:40:34 10:40:36 10:40:40 10:40:41 10:40:43 10:40:46 10:40:50 10:40:52 10:40:57 10:41:01 1

with.

Q. What were your goals in filing suit? A. To get them to stop taking information off our website. Q. Any other goals? MR. HOWARD: In answering that, Mr. Ellison, let me instruct you that you're not to reveal anything that is the subject of discussion with counsel. If you can answer that question outside of discussions with counsel, then you may do so, beyond what you already have. THE WITNESS: Well, we feel we've been severely damaged by what they've what they stole, and we're seeking compensation for those damages. MR. LANIER: Q. Without telling me anything lawyers have told you or that's been the subject of your conversations with the lawyers, what's your own understanding as you sit here today of the extent of the damage that Oracle has suffered? A. Well, we've lost you mean the extent you just want me to give you a number? Q. Yes, and I'll follow up. I'll probably have some more questions. But what's your

Page 11
10:38:36 10:38:37 10:38:38 10:38:45 10:38:47 10:38:48 10:38:52 10:38:55 10:38:59 10:39:01 10:39:08 10:39:11 10:39:14 10:39:17 10:39:20 10:39:23 10:39:26 10:39:31 10:39:31 10:39:33 10:39:37 10:39:40 10:39:41 10:39:44 10:39:47 1

Page 13
10:41:04 10:41:06 10:41:07 10:41:09

understanding of the number?

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q. What's the basis of that estimate? A. That we've lost I think there are three bases. SAP was successful in taking some of our customers from us by saying that we were overcharging our customers for support and they could do just as good a job for much less money. That SAP won competitive deals against us in fact, avoided competing with us entirely by saying Oracle wasn't the kind of company you want to do business with, because they overcharge for support, and we can do a better job for, you know, a fraction of that cost. So you shouldn't even look at their software. So they won a number of deals with us. And finally, thirdly, reputational damage. That even if you're a database customer, and SAP doesn't sell a database, you should consider the IBM database or someone else's database or someone else's middleware, because Oracle is the kind of company that overcharges for support, and it's just not the kind of company you want to do business

10:41:12 10:41:14 10:41:17 10:41:19 10:41:23 10:41:27 10:41:30 10:41:33 10:41:37 10:41:39 10:41:42 10:41:45 10:41:46 10:41:48 10:41:52 10:41:53 10:41:57 10:42:00 10:42:02 10:42:04 10:42:07

4 (Pages 10 to 13) Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

LARRY ELLISON May 5, 2009 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 58
11:31:17 11:31:20 11:31:21 11:31:22 11:31:24 11:31:29 11:31:31 11:31:33 11:31:36 11:31:38 11:31:42 11:31:44 11:31:45 11:31:48 11:31:53 11:31:57 11:31:59 11:32:01 11:32:05 11:32:06 11:32:08 11:32:11 11:32:13 11:32:17 11:32:21
11:33:44 11:33:49 11:33:51 11:33:55 11:33:59 11:34:01 11:34:04 11:34:05 11:34:08 11:34:12 11:34:15 11:34:16 11:34:19 11:34:22 11:34:24 11:34:29 11:34:32 11:34:33 11:34:36 11:34:39 11:34:41 11:34:44 11:34:45 11:34:48 11:34:51

Page 60

6 7 8 9 10

, MR. LANIER: Q. Let's go back to the PeopleSoft acquisition. What were your goals in entering into the PeopleSoft acquisition? A. To expand our applications business.

Page 59
11:32:25 11:32:37 11:32:39 11:32:41 11:32:43 11:32:47 11:32:50 11:32:53 11:32:56 11:33:00 11:33:02 11:33:05 11:33:07 11:33:09 11:33:12 11:33:14 11:33:16 11:33:18 11:33:23 11:33:27 11:33:29 11:33:32 11:33:35 11:33:38 11:33:42

Page 61
11:34:54 11:34:57 11:34:59 11:35:01 11:35:03 11:35:06 11:35:09 11:35:10 11:35:13 11:35:15 11:35:16 11:35:20 11:35:22 11:35:24 11:35:26 11:35:29 11:35:31 11:35:33 11:35:36 11:35:36 11:35:39 11:35:41 11:35:44 11:35:47 11:35:49

16 (Pages 58 to 61) Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

LARRY ELLISON May 5, 2009 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 102
12:36:11 12:36:13 12:36:16 12:36:18 12:36:21 12:36:24 12:36:26 12:36:27 12:36:30 12:36:33 12:36:35 12:36:36 12:36:38 12:36:41 12:36:45 12:36:47 12:36:52 12:36:55 12:36:57 12:37:01 12:37:03 12:37:05 12:37:08 12:37:11 12:37:15 12:38:16 12:38:17 12:38:18 12:38:23 12:38:26 12:38:29 12:38:32 12:38:32 12:38:35 12:38:37 12:38:38 12:38:39 12:38:41 12:38:44 12:38:45 12:38:51 12:38:56 12:38:59 12:39:03 12:39:05 12:39:08 12:39:12 12:39:17 12:39:21 12:39:24 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 104

Q. Okay. And I'm done with this one. We will look at something else in a moment. Another one that has not yet been marked -- we'll get to some that have soon, I am sure -- is a document that was also produced by Oracle. This one is highly confidential, attorneys's eyes only. It's titled "PeopleSoft, Inc. 2004 Forecast/2005 Planning Model - For Discussion Purposes Only," ORCL312844 through -868, and I believe it becomes Exhibit 401. (Deposition Exhibit 401 was marked for identification.)

Page 103
12:37:18 12:37:20 12:37:23 12:37:25 12:37:26 12:37:28 12:37:30 12:37:32 12:37:35 12:37:35 12:37:38 12:37:40 12:37:43 12:37:44 12:37:50 12:37:53 12:37:57 12:38:00 12:38:03 12:38:04 12:38:05 12:38:08 12:38:10 12:38:13 12:38:15
12:39:36 12:39:37 12:39:40 12:39:42 12:39:46 12:39:47 12:39:50 12:39:52 12:39:53 12:39:55 12:39:57 12:40:01 12:40:06 12:40:09 12:40:13 12:40:17 12:40:19 12:40:21 12:40:24 12:40:25 12:40:25 12:40:31 12:40:37 12:40:41 12:40:45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 105
MR. LANIER: Q. Mr. Ellison, I will ask you about a few specific pieces of this. I'm going to ask you some general questions about it first. But if you want to take a moment, just at least flip through it, because the first thing I'm going to ask you is if you've ever seen it before. So review it to whatever extent you think necessary. A. Not that I recall. Q. Okay. Do you recall seeing documents like this in the course of either considering the acquisition or integration planning with PeopleSoft? A. Sure. Yes. Q. Do you recall -- were you personally involved in planning for integration of the two companies after completion of the acquisition? A. On the engineering side only. Q. Okay. What about on the operations side? Meaning, you know, sales, marketing, support, things like that? A. No. Q. Who led those efforts? A. The existing team in sales and marketing. Q. So for example -- well, would Ms. Catz have been involved in those efforts, post -- planning for post-merger integration?

27 (Pages 102 to 105) Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]

LARRY ELLISON May 5, 2009 HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 106
12:40:46 12:40:49 12:40:51 12:40:53 12:40:56 12:40:58 12:41:01 12:41:04 12:41:05 12:41:08 12:41:11 12:41:16 13:00:39 13:00:40 13:00:42 13:00:44 13:00:48 13:00:49 13:00:52 13:00:53 13:00:56 13:00:56 13:00:57 13:00:58 13:01:02 1 2 3

Page 108
13:02:19 13:02:20 13:02:25 13:02:27 13:02:29 13:02:30 13:02:32 13:02:34 13:02:35 13:02:36 13:02:40 13:02:42 13:02:46 13:02:50 13:02:53 13:02:57 13:03:01 13:03:03 13:03:04 13:03:05 13:03:05 13:03:08 13:03:11 13:03:15 13:03:17

A. I think she certainly would have attended the meetings, but the primary responsibility would have been the sales and marketing guys.

Page 107
13:01:05 13:01:09 13:01:10 13:01:12 13:01:18 13:01:20 13:01:25 13:01:26 13:01:29 13:01:44 13:01:46 13:01:49 13:01:50 13:01:52 13:01:54 13:01:58 13:02:02 13:02:04 13:02:05 13:02:07 13:02:07 13:02:10 13:02:11 13:02:14 13:02:17
13:03:18 13:03:21 13:03:22 13:03:24 13:03:27 13:03:29 13:03:31 13:03:33 13:03:41 13:03:45 13:03:46 13:03:47 13:03:49 13:03:53 13:03:56 13:03:59 13:04:01 13:04:04 13:04:07 13:04:08 13:04:10 13:04:12 13:04:14 13:04:16 13:04:17

Page 109

28 (Pages 106 to 109) Merrill Legal Solutions [phone]