Tech giant SAP asks US Supreme Court to reconsider rival's antitrust win
June 4 (Reuters) - Europe's largest software maker SAP (SAPG.DE) has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision that said the technology giant must face a lawsuit by U.S. data technology company Teradata accusing it of violating antitrust law.
SAP in a petition, opens new tab made public on Tuesday said a decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California that reinstated Teradata's lawsuit will threaten American tech innovation if it is left in place.
Teradata accused SAP of violating antitrust law by 'tying' sales of business-planning applications with the purchase of a key SAP database that can perform transactional and analytical functions. Teradata makes a rival analytics database.
In its filing at the high court, SAP said the integration of software products can often benefit consumers and 'represent an effort to 'compete effectively,' rather than to stifle competition."
SAP declined to comment. Teradata did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
San Diego-based Teradata filed its lawsuit against SAP in federal court in California in 2018. The two companies once had a joint venture, but SAP terminated it after developing its own analytics database.
SAP won in the district court, but the 9th Circuit revived Teradata's case in December. The appeals court said there was material dispute between the companies that a jury could decide.
If the Supreme Court takes the case, the justices could rule on which legal standard judges should use to weigh antitrust tying claims.
Two key legal standards guide how judges resolve whether conduct restrains competition: the 'per se rule,' where alleged conduct is presumed illegal, and the 'rule of reason,' where judges balance between anticompetitive effects and a defendant's procompetitive justification.
The 9th Circuit, using a version of the 'per se rule,' applied too stringent a standard in evaluating Teradata's claims, SAP told the justices.
SAP said the appellate court's ruling clashed with how a Washington federal appeals court resolved a landmark antitrust case against Microsoft in the 1990s.
The case is SAP SE et al v. Teradata Corp, U.S. Supreme Court, unassigned.
For SAP: Kannon Shanmugam of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison
For Teradata: No appearance yet
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
33 minutes ago
- Reuters
S&P Global 'positive' on Wells Fargo as regulatory burden lifts
June 6 (Reuters) - S&P Global (SPGI.N), opens new tab upgraded its outlook on Wells Fargo (WFC.N), opens new tab to "positive" from "stable", the ratings provider said on Friday, after the U.S. bank was released from a $1.95 trillion asset cap earlier this week. The U.S. Federal Reserve's unprecedented, seven-year long punitive measure was imposed on Wells in 2018 and restricted balance sheet growth so the bank could address rampant governance and compliance concerns that had been brought to light in a fake accounts scandal in 2016. The Fed's unanimous decision on Tuesday capped years of efforts by the bank to repair the damage and pay off billions of dollars in fines, sending Wells Fargo shares to a three-month high a day later. The stock has gained nearly 8.3% in a year where the benchmark S&P 500 (.SPX), opens new tab has remained flat. "The positive outlook on the holding company reflects our view that Wells Fargo has substantially improved its underlying governance, risk, and control profile, allowing for the removal of the Fed's asset cap," said S&P. S&P also expects Wells to expand its commercial and investment banking business, "the unit most affected by the asset cap and one that had to turn away some nonoperational deposits from customers." While the fourth-largest U.S. lender was forced to carefully manage wholesale deposits and its markets business, assets of peer JPMorgan Chase (JPM.N), opens new tab swelled by nearly $2 trillion since the start of 2018, while those of Bank of America (BAC.N), opens new tab and PNC Financial (PNC.N), opens new tab added about $1 trillion and nearly $200 billion, respectively.
Telegraph
39 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trump vs Musk is the final battle before economic catastrophe
Who needs reality TV when there's the psychodrama of Trump's White House to keep us all entertained? As plot lines go, the falling out between Elon Musk and Donald Trump was perhaps about as predictable as they come, but the sheer venom, speed and combustibility of the divorce has nevertheless proved utterly captivating. Even the best of Hollywood scriptwriters would have struggled to do better. The stench of betrayal hangs heavy in the air, a veritable revenger's tragedy of a drama. Beneath it all, however, lies a rather more serious matter than the sight of two of the world's richest and most powerful men breaking up and exchanging insults. And it's one which afflicts nearly all major, high income economies. Slowly but surely – and at varying speeds – they are all going bust. Yet few of them even seem capable of recognising it, let alone doing anything to correct it. None more so than the United States, where the Congressional Budget Office last week estimated that Trump's 'one big, beautiful bill' would add a further $2.4 trillion to the national debt by 2034. Let's not take sides, but Musk was absolutely right when he described the bill as 'a disgusting abomination'. It taxes far too little, and it spends far too much. It is hard to imagine a more reckless piece of make-believe. Musk had backed Trump not just out of self-interest – more government contracts, protection of the electric vehicle mandate, personal aggrandisement and so on – but because he genuinely believed he could help stop the US from bankrupting itself. This has proved a monumental conceit. The $2 trillion of savings in federal spending he initially promised has turned out to be at most $200bn, and probably substantially less once double accounting and wishful thinking is factored in. In any case, against total federal spending last year of nearly £7 trillion, it is but a drop in the ocean, and only goes to show just how difficult it is to find serious savings in government administration even when given a free hand with the headcount.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Breakingviews - Elon Musk picks a losing fight with Donald Trump
NEW YORK, June 6 (Reuters Breakingviews) - Money can buy power, but Elon Musk paid for someone else to have it. After spending more than $250 million backing Donald Trump's presidential campaign, an acrimonious schism erupted between the two and swiftly vaporized $150 billion of Tesla's (TSLA.O), opens new tab market value. By picking a losing fight, the carmaker's boss is putting even more at risk for himself and his investors. A cozy alliance between the world's richest man and its most powerful one pointed to a troubling oligarchy. Musk joined Team Trump to lead a controversial effort to slash costs from the U.S. bureaucracy. Tesla sales sank internationally, protests at showrooms escalated and concerns about the CEO's focus intensified. He left his Department of Government Efficiency post last week, with an amicable White House sendoff. The tone abruptly changed on Thursday. Musk's criticism of Trump's signature budget legislation and the president's retorts about government contracts with Musk's companies spiraled into a deeply personal social-media war of words. Musk is a formidable force, with a net worth approaching $400 billion, according, opens new tab to Forbes. His rocket company SpaceX accounted for 85% of orbit-bound cargo in early 2024 by one estimate. After paying $44 billion to buy Twitter, he remade it into a friendlier forum for the president's followers. Any tinkering with the algorithms might swing the tone, as could Musk's bulging wallet if used to support anti-Trump candidates. A threat, opens new tab from Trump to cut U.S. government purse strings from Musk's businesses flaunts the real balance of power, however. About $22 billion of contracts hang in the balance at SpaceX alone, Reuters reported. Tesla's deep ties in China, where it generated a fifth of revenue last year, also may tempt the president's ire as he wages a highly combative trade war with Beijing. Reprisals from President Xi Jinping also could be painful. Musk is doing his companies no favors either. He pivoted Tesla away from mass-market dominance to pursue autonomous driving instead. National regulators have nagging questions about robotic taxi services. A more hostile regulatory environment would undermine the moonshot, leaving a shrinking car business falling behind Chinese rivals. If Musk doesn't back down, as he hinted was a possibility, the costs are bound to escalate. Having already alienated pro-renewable-energy Democrats, he may scare off pro-Trump Republicans, too. An adversarial relationship with SpaceX is probably untenable for NASA. Raising money for his artificial intelligence venture may get harder, as would securing U.S. government contracts for his tunneling company. Musk achieved success by defying perceived scientific constraints, but he is now pushing up against the limits of money. Follow Jonathan Guilford on X, opens new tab and Linkedin, opens new tab.
