Conspiracy; espionage; “Project Blue;” massive illegal downloading; corporate theft on a grand scale.

These are just a few of the many words Oracle has used to describe SAP’s alleged illegal activity with its third-party support subsidiary, TomorrowNow.

What are Oracle’s latest accusations, and how has SAP responded?

In a court filing amended for a second time Monday, Oracle is now claiming that SAP was aware of and covered up TomorrowNow’s illegal activity — an operation, which Oracle says SAP called “Project Blue.” According to Oracle,  SAP “unlawfully accessed, copied and wrongfully used Oracle’s enterprise software applications and [specifically] Software and Support Materials.”

This comes right after SAP closed the books on its troublesome TomorrowNow chapter last week by cutting ties with the company and sending TomorrowNow customers back to Oracle or cheaper third-party supports.

Although SAP denied that the lawsuit was connected with its decision to close TomorrowNow, in this article attorney Hillard M. Sterling says differently:

“This is SAP’s way to rid itself of a troubled subsidiary, as well as a problematic lawsuit… Clearly there was impropriety. SAP’s only hope is to settle the lawsuit quickly and avoid becoming connected with the allegations.”

Now it seems to be too late. In this second-amended complaint, Oracle takes the TomorrowNow suit right to SAP’s door. The 70-page document(pdf) alleges that over three years ago, SAP executive board members received a “business case” presentation for the purchase of TomorrowNow, in which it was “made clear that TomorrowNow did not operate legally.” The SAP executives allegedly ignored these warnings.

Here are some other accusations and points made by Oracle against SAP in the latest court filing:

- “For years, SAP AG profited from SAP TN’s illegal business model, without breathing a word about it to Oracle, SAP AG’s existing and prospective customers, or the investing public.”

  -”… SAP has spent years systematically taking unauthorized support materials from Oracle’s systems, most recently using a dedicated bank of twenty servers in a “download center” and a customized software tool called “Titan.”

- “In many instances, including the ones described above, SAP TN employees used the log-in IDs of multiple customers, combined with phony user log-in information, to gain access to Oracle’s system under false pretexts.”

-”SAP appears to have downloaded virtually every file, in every library that it could find.”

-”The downloads are just a piece of a larger scheme. For years, dating atleast to 2003, SAP TN created thousands of copies of Oracle’s actual software applications.”

These are clearly some heavy allegations, but SAP has remained fairly quiet the second time around. After the first-amended complaint by Oracle last July, SAP released this statement, in which they acknowledged inappropriate downloads at TomorrowNow but denied that they had access to these materials. 

SAP issued the following response Monday: “This amended complaint [by Oracle] repeats many of the themes and allegations in Oracle’s amended complaint filed in 2007. SAP will respond to this amended complaint in Court [on September 11, 2008].”

Are you surprised by these allegations? Do you think SAP’s closure of TomorrowNow was a hint in their alleged involvement? Do you have any predictions as to how this will be resolved?

Ever since the Oracle-BEA deal was given the green light by the federal government in February, we’ve all been asking the same questions:

How will Oracle combine the two company’s middleware offerings? Will BEA customers be forced to migrate to the new products? How will this change Oracle’s SOA and application server strategies?

This month, we’ve finally gotten some answers, along with some positive feedback. The Wall Street Journal summed it up by saying that after Oracle’s July 1 webcast, which revealed the company’s BEA plans, one thing is certainly clear: “Oracle is getting a knack for handling acquisitions.”

So, how is Oracle handling this one? Here are some recent highlights:

• The upcoming Oracle Communications Service Delivery portfolio will combine components of the former BEA WebLogic Communications middleware and Oracle Fusion Middleware.
• A key part of this integrated service delivery portfolio will be the Oracle Communications Services Gatekeeper 4.0 (formerly the BEA WebLogic Network Gatekeeper): a set of automated developer tools that will help service providers deal with third-party partners.
• Oracle President Charles Phillips said to BEA customers and partners: “There will be no forced migration at all.”
• In SOA news, the two companies’ ESB technologies (Oracle’s ESB and BEA’s AquaLogic) will be combined into a single, new product. Oracle will also have new Eclipse tools and a new platform for Java-based tools.

It all looks great on paper. But is everyone (including BEA customers) really satisfied?

According to a recent survey conducted by SearchSOA.com (before the July 1 webcast), many BEA users are uneasy about the BEA acquisition and the future of BEA products. Out of those polled, 52% reported a somewhat or very negative view of the acquisition, and 32% voted neutral. The survey also indicated a lack of confidence in Oracle, current satisfaction with BEA products and an unwillingness to migrate over to the new offerings.

A follow-up with poll respondents reiterated these opinions. One senior software developer had this to say:

“It’s very difficult for BEA users to migrate their existing applications running on BEA products, but they can be convinced.”

What do you think of the recent developments from the acquisition? Is it just a matter of time before everyone feels comfortable with the new products? What other extra steps can Oracle take to make sure BEA customers are kept informed and involved? What can Oracle’s other acquisitions teach us about what will happen with BEA?

That screaming you heard today? That was the sound of hundreds of IT professionals reacting to the Apple App Store created today for the new iPhone. A 3G version of the phone is being released this week and enterprise software vendors are beginning to take notice, giving credibility to the iPhone in the enterprise, yet another mobile device IT will have to support.

That certainly holds true for Oracle shops. Oracle today began offering a free download on the App Store, Apple’s directory of applications for the new iPhone and iPod touch. Oracle will offer “business indicators” from Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition Plus and Business Intelligence Applications, Fusion Edition.

Anyone with access to the application can be granted access on the iPhone; the authentication and security work the same, according to Lenley Hensarling, group vice president of application development.

Oracle will be creating more CRM-focused applications in the future by is not releasing a road map.

While the Blackberry still rules the enterprise, and Salesforce.com and Oracle appear to be among just a handful of enterprise application vendors offering products on the App Store, the iPhone does appear to be gaining ground — if only within Oracle itself.

Hensarling himself is an iPhone user and plans to get the latest device.

“I was a reluctant believer,” he said. “For four months after the first one came out I didn’t buy one. I just watched people on my staff, my peers to start to show up with them and the feedback was it was a lot easier and it works great with standards based email.”

If users are snapping up the popular phone and Oracle is creating its own applications for it, chances are your IT department is going to need to start supporting it, if it doesn’t already.

Are you ready? Maybe you can keep the iPhone out of your company but for how long?

The Sept. 21 kickoff of Oracle OpenWorld 2008 is rapidly approaching, and many bloggers are asking the same question:

To go or not to go?

Some people are not too happy, claiming Oracle is suggesting- -or at least making it easier- -to do the latter.

Last year, Oracle opened up its conference to bloggers for the first time- -it was a move that may have been well-intentioned, but the end result was steeped in controversy.

People were upset that Oracle sent out invitations to bloggers but would not pick up their travel expenses. What may have been more upsetting, however, was Oracle’s reasoning: “This will keep [the bloggers] impartial.”

Can bloggers be so easily be “bought?” Does Oracle favor bloggers with a pro-Oracle bias?

The decision caused an outcry in the blogosphere. ZDNet’s Dennis Howlett, for example, accused Oracle of having double standards, and also disapproved of what he said was an unwillingness to give bloggers access to Oracle executives.  Others compared Oracle to SAP, a company that reportedly often pays for bloggers- -even the most critical ones- - to attend its events.  

There is nothing, however, indicating that Oracle pays the OpenWorld travel expenses for any other members of the media, other than accredited press from overseas (this may explain some of Howlett’s frustration- -he is located in Spain). So, maybe the real questions here aren’t about Oracle’s expense-paying policies, but rather how they view the role of bloggers.

So… how do bloggers differ from the rest of the accredited press?

When the OpenWorld blogger program was recently renewed for this year’s conference, only a couple of differences were announced. The first difference is that there is now a blogger credential; bloggers no longer register as Press. No, this isn’t a very significant change - - but, if Oracle is going to officially lump bloggers into their own category, how should “bloggers” be defined? How do you think Oracle envisions these differences?  What if you’re a member of the press but have a blog as well? (think SearchOracle.com, for example).

The second difference in this year’s program is that “there will be a more cohesive program assembled for bloggers.” This, in my opinion, is what matters the most - - that Oracle (especially as they begin to outline their Web 2.0 plans) is willing to continue to invest in bloggers and give them new opportunities. As Jake from Oracle AppsLab, one of the pioneers of the blogger program, said last year: “This is new territory for a lot of us, and personally, I’d like to hear a lot more opinions and suggestions before I support one path or another.”

I’ve asked many tough questions, and it seems like people have yet to agree on solutions. So, if we are yet to have all the answers to this relatively new blogging phenomenon, why should Oracle be expected to? Despite the controversy (Howlett thinks there are a lot of negatives this year as well), does Oracle at least have the right idea with the OpenWorld blogger program? What do you think?

It’s no secret that Larry Ellison is in his business for the money. Therefore, his reason for laying low in the on-demand software industry — he says software-as-a service (SaaS) isn’t profitable enough — should come as no surprise.

It may also be easy to question Ellison’s reasoning given the way it’s been embraced by so many in the IT business, including Oracle rival SAP.

SAP, which had a change of heart about SaaS last year (CEO Henning Kagermann called it “game changing” and “the better model”), hopes to have 1,000 subscribers to Business ByDesign, its SaaS-based ERP suite for SMBs by the end of 2008.

Ellison, on the other hand, seems to have dismissed SaaS, at least for the time being. In this recent Information Age article, he points to the low profits of on-demand CRM provider Salesforce.com.

“The entire on-demand industry has to get better at making money in selling on-demand software,” he says.

This isn’t the first time Ellison’s rejected the idea of SaaS, a model that requires less licensing and consulting fees than traditional software. In September, Ellison compared Oracle’s SaaS strategy (focusing on adding value to the large companies it already serves) with SAP’s (going after smaller companies with new products like Business ByDesign).

As ZDNet blogger Larry Dignan puts it:

“Here’s Ellison’s strategy: Let SAP figure SaaS out and crow if the rival fails. If SAP is successful–it probably will be over time–Ellison buys NetSuite [the SaaS ERP provider that Ellison owns a majority stake in] from himself.”

But does Ellison have the right idea?

Some people seem to think so. In his recent blog post, “Does Larry Ellison have the best SaaS strategy?”, Dingan credits Ellison for taking a step back in such a difficult, slow-growing market.

Others, however, have higher hopes for SaaS. Blogger Phil Wainewright has criticized what he calls “Oracle’s misconceived SaaS strategy,” and at the start of this year, Wainewright gave his “Eight reasons SaaS will surge in 2008.” Among these include a wider move to Internet-based services, the emergence of virtualization technology and a slowing economy that will make lower-cost options more appealing for customers.

So, maybe signs are pointing to this being a big year for SaaS. But if it is, how soon will Ellison pounce? Do you think it would be worth it for Ellison to take his customers–rather than his profits–into consideration sooner rather than later? And what does it all mean for NetSuite and Oracle’s existing SaaS-based application Oracle CRM OnDemand, a vestige of Siebel’s foray into the business? Could you benefit from a wider Oracle SaaS offering, or is Ellison right in his strategy?