SAP Admits to 'Inappropriate' Downloading of Oracle Code 149
netbuzz writes "SAP's CEO Henning Kagermann uses the undoubtedly lawyered term 'inappropriate download' to describe the company's questionable actions. Henning blames a rogue business unit, but there can be no mistaking the fact that Oracle caught SAP with its hand in the IP jar on this one. The legal proceedings that will follow should prove interesting. 'The admission hurts SAP's reputation in the battle with Larry Ellison's Oracle in the $56 billion market for software that manages tasks such as payroll. The rivalry between SAP and Oracle escalated when Oracle filed its March 22 lawsuit claiming SAP workers hacked into a Web site and stole software codes on a grand scale.'"
Sound familiar? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sound familiar? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The logfile in my server closet says otherwise -- your grep is all over it.
Who would have guessed (Score:2)
Codes plural? (Score:5, Funny)
They stoles codes? Oh noes!
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
one of my pet peeves is pluralizing codes. its like broadcasting to the world "i do not know what i am talking about!". unless you are talking abuot the interwebnet codes.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
(checks again)
developers.slashdot.org
(pounds head on desk)
Re:Codes plural? (Score:4, Informative)
It depends on the subculture. In scientific computing and high-performance computing, it is common to refer to programs as 'codes'. This language originates from one of the original supercomputer applications, hydrocodes [afrlhorizons.com].
If you went to the system administrator of a large computing cluster and asked "what codes are you running now?", he would immediately grok that you know what you're talking about. I wouldn't be at all surprised if big iron Oracle people used the same terminology.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am not American, I don't know about OJ case and the Wikipedi
Re: (Score:2)
But usually makes for confussion when things where completely clear and unambiguous until "precise wording" is used. In this case, saying it was stolen clearly and unambiguously conveys what happened. Conceptually, the depiction is completely accurate so describing a legal technicality makes absolutely no sense what so ever. The meat or spirit of the crime has been effectively communicated. And since effective communication is the inten
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Bah (Score:2, Insightful)
Can I get a consensus opinion? (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe that the Slashdot zeitgeist is that the word "stole" is used incorrectly here -- many Slashdotters believe that the term "to steal" should only be applied to an instance where a physical item is moved from one place to another, and should not be applied to instances of copyright infringement or unauthorized duplication -- although I presume that exceptions can be made for "theft of service," "identity theft," "you stole my thunder," "stolen kisses" and the like.
So -- was the code really stolen?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
That doesn't mean that copyright infringement isn't wrong or illegal - it just isn't theft.
Re:Can I get a consensus opinion? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
No. Theft is the removal of property with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it. This is not removal of property, it is the illegal copying of IP. Therefore, illegal, but not theft. "Stole", "Stealing", etc. seem to have a less theft-y connotation than "theft", in general use, and tend to pass in these cases without much argument, but that needs to stop. Theft is theft, and infringement is not.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
The US has different laws to cover ideas that are publicly known (copyright) and held privately (trade secrets). One can steal a trade secret (by making it un-secret), but not a copyrighted work.
Re: (Score:2)
Just knowing his safe code is not a crime; obtaining it through illegal means (the aforementioned breaking and entering) is the part that is against the law.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
YES, I AM SAYING EXACTLY THAT!
Pretend now that my safe is on display at the end of my driveway, and you, passing by, happen to see the combination written on the front of it. Have you stolen it? No. The only thing you've done illegally in your example is Break and Enter.
Pretend I leave my wallet open on a table, and you read my credit card number. Have you 'stolen' the 'se
Re: (Score:2)
-matthew
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Tell that to the Rosenbergs... [wikipedia.org]
Re:Can I get a consensus opinion? (Score:5, Funny)
I don't follow you. Can you try again with a car analogy?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Stop this already. Car analogies do not work when applied to software or copyright issues.
Using a car analogy to explain copyright issues is like adding a Pontiac engine to a Honda.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, so, like, imagine you take your car. And you leave the key in the ignition with the doors unlocked and the windows down.
But that's like totally okay, because you're actually in the car, driving it.
So, like, then imagine you drive your car to a library. You know, like the kind with books. And, like, with photocopiers. I'm sure you see where this is going, right? So you take a book down off the shelf - say, an illustrated guide t
Re: (Score:2)
To use popular terminology, sure, you've "stolen" the combination. But legally you haven't. You've engaged in breaking and entering and trespass. But writing down something you've seen isn't a crime and you can't be charged for it. Heck
Re: (Score:2)
They should have used Bill Gates' precident: removing code from a dumpster. That went unchallenged for years and now that method is not enforceable.
When you take something that doesn't belong to you (Score:2, Insightful)
We are stone-cold thieves. That's the human condition.
Re:When you take something that doesn't belong to (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Can I get a consensus opinion? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Can I get a consensus opinion? (Score:5, Informative)
The issue here is that SAP used underhanded (and illegal, likely) tactics to derive an advantage over a direct competitor in the support space -- they "stole" trade secrets.
Sure, it doesn't seem like a big deal, but remember that Oracle paid developers to write and test that code -- and SAP got an easy hand up in building similar patches / support mechanisms for what they address.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, there are differences between essential patches and non-essential ones. Security holes, operating flaws, sure -- I agree with you. But a lot of other patches are to introduce more functionality or to improve efficiency, and if you choose to buy software as-is, and then go elsewhere for support -- well, then, why should you have access to those patches? You certainly aren't contributing financially to the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Some guys in a support center used logins that weren't theirs (but they were given permission to use) to gain access to software patches and support documents
I don't know if I should be thankful that someone finally put all that into perspective or disgusted that so many other people run with the spin ("they stole code" as if they made off with an entire codebase repository and turned it into a multi-billion dollar OS after chaning the --version string) and try to make it stick as hard as possible.
Parent needs to be +5 and reindexed to the top of the page.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, as dictionary.com defines it:
1. the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another
With identity theft, you are taking someone else's reputation/credit and depriving them of it (by ruining it)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Similarly, the other examples you gave: "theft of service," "identity theft," "you stole my thunder," "stolen kisses". None of those are "theft" in the legal sense (in fact half are not even illegal). Moreover, if you were trying to have a refined argument about any one of those topics, I believe most rational
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
As it isnt property, that dictionary definition obviously does not apply.
Perhaps you could come up with some other word to define 'to violate someones government granted monopoly without right or permission'. Stealing, however, just isnt it.
Re: (Score:1)
Identity theft (Score:2)
As for stealing code, I think the problem is not actually that the code is stolen but that the copyright and license have been vi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Stolen Code (Score:2)
If they merely copied, then no, nothing was stolen.
Why does the press refer to IP infringement as theft? It gets the common folk riled up. Remember the press is tied directly to the 'media' which desperately needs this to move their agenda along.
Re: (Score:2)
Copyright != Trade Secret (Score:2)
While the term "intellectual property" has little collective meaning, there are four types of government protection that is generally classified as "IP":
Copyright
Patent
Trademark
Trade Secret
Slashdot seems unable to grasp the existence of the fourth one. When a copyright is infringed on, it is
Re: (Score:2)
No (Score:2)
Of course if people keep having a muddled thinking about stuff then the definition of words could change and then the lawyers and judges could then interpret the laws differently.
The *AA naturally would be happy if their preferred meaning of theft is spread.
In fact, retroactive extensions of copyright
Re: (Score:2)
No, the code wasn't stolen: the code was potentially unlawfully duplicated (Since they haven't been convicted for the fact yet)
But I doubt it would make an exciting headline.
Honeypot? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Since the evidence that they stole the code is overwhelming, they've admitted to that. But, of course, after going through the trouble of stealing their biggest competitor's code, they didn't actually do anything with it that could be illegal... No.
In other words, they didn't inhale.
Re: (Score:1)
Confused (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
That is how Oracle sends out updates to it's ERP software. The customer uses a user ID and password to log into a secure site and then the customer is free to download any patch necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
Most inappropriate use of the word "inappropriate" (Score:3, Interesting)
This is illegal and perhaps fradulent (ie they claimed they were customers seeking service). But what gets me the most about this is how blisteringly stupid it is. "There's no way they could know it's us! Well, there's no way, apart from the webserver logs, that they could know it's us!".
From the article: So not only are they picking a legal fight with Oracle, pissing of the DOJ, and destroying their reputation, but they've basically shown they're not above pretending to be their customers. I bet the SAP CEO is turfed before the end of the next quarter.
Re:Most inappropriate use of the word "inappropria (Score:3, Interesting)
FTA (emphasis mine):
That is most certainly the case.
And now for the snark. Wtf? PR special forces? What kind of training does that require? Going seven days without using buzzspeak or powerpoint? Writing press releases and giving presentatio
Re: (Score:2)
Blackberry.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why, any color you want them to be!
Re:Most inappropriate use of the word "inappropria (Score:2)
Re:Most inappropriate use of the word "inappropria (Score:3, Interesting)
Too bad... (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm all for free software licensing. I just don't think the people at the forefront of the free software licensing are the people who should have any control over it at all.
what if it was a setup (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
While it's feasible someone with "pull" at Oracle is dumb enough to try something like that, it's not within the realm of reasonable probability. Courtesy of Sorbannes-Oxley, companies have checks and balances built in to prevent just these types of things (audits and reviews), meaning that the collusive elements required to pull this off would be fairly distributed, and difficult to contain.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, though. If they HAD paid someone to do that... Would that person not be sitting on a ton of blackmail? Oracle could never get away with it.
Not Source Code (Score:5, Informative)
It was Technical Support documents and patches that SAP was downloading. The only "theft" here is that SAP did not have support contracts to download the patches and documents.
Re:Not Source Code (Score:4, Interesting)
Heh (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
That's what she said.
Sorry. Had to be done.
Re: (Score:2)
Ignoratio elenchi - I don't see why the former implies the latter.
When you think something isn't funny, feel free to ignore it, or we end up wasting even more internet ink (the conservation of which, I am assuming, is your goal here).
Oh, and I am not American.
Summary is slanted - no "hacking" involved... (Score:4, Informative)
Who cares? (Score:2)
Information wants to be free. Does not it?
Embarrassing (Score:1)
Had to happen sometime (Score:2, Informative)
I used to work for SAP's IT dept. TomorrowNow is a third party support provider for Oracle products, including PeopleSoft and JD Edwards. SAP purchased them to provide a support bridge for products Oracle would be sunsetting, and hopefully bring those customers to SAP's product line as they eventually migrated away from the legacy products.
Clever idea, but this sort of situation was always a concern. How do you provide support for your competitors' products without getting dangerously close to (actual or
Re: (Score:2)
Pants Down Henning (Score:2)
Uhhh yeah. That would be your "Industrial Espionage Division."
Re: SAP Admits to 'Inappropriate' Downloading (Score:4, Funny)