Slashdot Mirror


U.S. Attempts to Block Oracle Bid for PeopleSoft

AliasF97 writes "Thought you all might be interested in this story about the U.S. government attempting to block Oracle's bid for PeopleSoft via a civil anti-trust lawsuit. Seems to me that the courts are going to have their work cut out for them on this one. Also, the photo of Ellison is kind of comical. If you were to throw a black cape and a tall hat on him, he could be a circus magician."

7 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. Holes in there argument by pvt_medic · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "said the combination of Oracle and PeopleSoft would hurt competition in the market for software sold to large businesses."

    So they would hurt large businesses... right and I am buying that microsoft not offering patches helps businesses.

    --
    30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
    Score:5, Troll
  2. Odd. by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Considering the outcome of the Microsoft antitrust trial I thought the DoJ and present administration were friendly towards mega corporations.

    Maybe Larry doesn't contribute enough towards ... uh .. certain funding. Then again, maybe PeopleSoft has connections.

    After the spying on the UN scandals in the news this morning my head is swimming.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  3. Re:Oracle still gets the benefits by saitoh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well, not really. (If Peoplesoft publicised this better it probably would help quell fears, but anyway, thats a different problem).

    Peoplesoft has a golden clause in their company constitution that states along the lines of:

    "If a hostile takeover is done, support must be granted for all customers within the last X years or a full refund of the receipt price will be granted"

    Got that tidbit from my advisor who worked with Peoplesoft at NAU university with a beta development team.

    -- Page

    --
    We don't need an "overrated" so much as we need a "you completely missed the parent's point, dumbass..."
  4. Re:Shoot my dog will you... by Unoti · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Perhaps this deal was meant to be bungled?

    If Oracle intended this whole deal as FUD to encourage people not to buy PeopleSoft, they couldn't have done a better job.

    One of the main things people look for when they buy ERP software is longevity in the software package, and knowledge that the software will flourish in the future. This deal casts a tremendous doubt on PeopleSoft in that regard. So just the talk of this alone helps Oracle tremendously in their competition with PeopleSoft.

  5. Re:mod parent up by nelsonal · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the ERP market, what exactly has Oracle done? SAP dominates that market. The whole thing is a result of PeopleSoft feeding documents to the DoJ to quash the merger. How come the DoJ didn't have a problem with #2 buying the then #3 ERP company about six months ago? It's mostly a pissing match between Larry and Craig, looks like Craig won this round. Oracle should set its sights on BEA and pick off Peoplesoft in a few years.

    --
    Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
  6. Re:mod parent up by nazzdeq · · Score: 5, Interesting

    For Christ's sake, stop whining about Microsoft. What freakin' Monopoly? I'm here using Mac OS X and the only MS product I use is Office, and that's because I want to. A monopoly is where you don't have another choice, like AT&T used to be. You couldn't switch phone services because there was no one else. There's nothing preventing any company in the world from switching to FreeBSD, Linux or Mac OS X. I've worked at a company that used nothing from MS. We used Linux, Informix, JBoss and Star Office. I wish the courts would stop listening to this nonsense as well. It hurts the whole industry.

  7. Nothing to do with proof. by k_head · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It all has to do with campaign contributions. Ellison is a well known donor to democrats so he must be punished by Ashcroft. Just like Martha Stewart. Martha stewart is on trial because she prevented a 60 thousand dollar loss. Ken Lay and Bernie Ebbers were never even tried for ripping of tens of billions of dollars from people. Bernie Ebbers alone accounted for nine billion dollars of fraud by worldcom.

    Guess who those two contributed most money to?

    --
    The best way to support the US war effort is to continue buying American products.