Prime Highlights:
The 15-year copyright battle between Rimini Street and Oracle returns to the U.S. appeals court, focusing on a $58 million legal fee award to Oracle.
Rimini seeks to overturn the legal fee award, arguing that it is unjustified, claiming Oracle is not the prevailing party.
Key Background:
After 15 years of intense litigation, the long-standing copyright dispute between software support company Rimini Street and technology giant Oracle has returned to the U.S. appeals court. Rimini is seeking to overturn a $58 million legal fee award granted to Oracle in September 2024.
In its opening brief, Rimini’s legal team, led by Weil, Gotshal & Manges and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, urged the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to reject the fee award, arguing it is unjustified. This legal battle traces back to Oracle’s accusations that Rimini illegally used its software and support materials to provide technical assistance to clients using Oracle’s enterprise software. Rimini began offering these services in 2008, which led Oracle to file a lawsuit in 2010.
A federal judge in Nevada awarded Oracle $58.1 million in damages, along with an additional $31.9 million in attorney fees, following a 2015 jury verdict. This decision stemmed from allegations that Rimini had infringed on Oracle’s copyrights. In a separate 2014 lawsuit, Rimini sought a ruling that it had ceased the alleged copyright violations, but in 2023, a judge ruled in Oracle’s favor on some claims. However, the 9th Circuit vacated most of that ruling in December 2024.
Rimini’s lead appellate lawyer, Mark Perry, argued that Oracle’s claims were unsuccessful despite years of litigation. Perry emphasized that Oracle had failed to meet the threshold for a valid copyright infringement case, particularly after seeking damages exceeding $1.4 billion. He contended that Oracle should not be entitled to the substantial legal fees awarded, as the company was not the prevailing party. Both Oracle and Rimini have yet to comment on the latest developments, as the case continues to unfold in the appeals court.
