Former Oracle execs warn that Big Red's auditing process is also a 'sales enablement tool'

'Most of it – if not all of it – really amounts to fear, uncertainty and doubt'

A group of former Oracle executives with roles across its software compliance teams have described the close links between Big Red's auditing process and its drive to increase revenue.

Speaking during a webinar broadcast last week, Adi Ahuja, senior director of Palisade Compliance and former Oracle licence management services (LMS) manager, said that Oracle's audit has become "a sales enablement tool."

[S]ales has far more power within Oracle than the audit team. If sales want something done, they get their way

Oracle's website says Oracle LMS "operates independently from any ongoing commercial discussions. Our services are delivered by a global team of highly experienced and knowledgeable consultants who collectively offer unrivaled knowledge on all aspects of Oracle's licensing policy."

However, in practice there was a close relationship between sales and licence audits, Ahuja said.

"There are sales goals that are based on audit numbers and how much revenue comes from auditing customers. It's not like they're just doing it in a vacuum. Typically, [auditors] get permission or approval from the [sales] team, so they're aware; and sales has far more power within Oracle than the audit team. If sales want something done, they get their way. A lot of the time what the audit has become is a sales enablement tool. The auditor goes in, finds some leverages and hand that to the sales team and you negotiate with them."

Ahuja was speaking at a webinar by Palisade Compliance, a company that advises and represents Oracle customers in issues and disputes around licensing Big Red's software.

Speaking on the call, Craig Guarente, Palisade CEO and former Oracle veep in the LMS team, said the participants represented 50 years of experience in dealing with Oracle licensing practices.

He noted that there was nothing illegal about Oracle, or any company, using auditing to drive revenue.

However, Ryan Bendana, Palisade Compliance director of delivery, said Oracle's LMS were there to help sales teams facilitate conversations.

"Oracle has a lot of sales reps and they're all very hungry and they're all chomping at the bit to try to sell something. A lot of customers tend to be annoyed with Oracle for good reason. LMS is actually a great facilitator to open up a dialogue, and that's what sales is doing."

The Register has asked Oracle for its point of view.

Oracle customers are also experiencing challenges over licensing in VMware environments, other Palisade experts claimed.

The issue dates back to 2015 after US confectionery giant Mars took Oracle to court in the US over its licensing terms following an audit. Mars was assisted by Palisade.

The Register found that similar issues had been affecting a number of customers. Oracle does not accept VMware's worldview on licensing and its definition of hardware partitioning. An Oracle partitioning document showed how it only accepted Solaris containers, IBM's LPAR, and Fujitsu's PAR. VMware was not on the list of hard partitioning partners.

Ahuja said one of the biggest misconceptions on Oracle audits remained around the VMware issue. "That is in the middle of every audit and the driver of half their deals. I still find it outlandish."

The panel also discussed challenges as Oracle users move to the cloud and the licensing pitfalls that transition might present.

Last year, Oracle failed to block a legal case that alleges it inflated cloud revenues with dubious sales practices, although the vendor succeeded in reducing its scope. Big Red denies the claim made by a group of investors led by the City of Sunrise Firefighters' Pension Fund in 2020, which alleged Oracle misled investors about sales of its cloud products by threatening customers with expensive software licensing audits unless they agreed to use Oracle's cloud software. The most recent amended complaint in the case was filed in June [PDF] last year.

On the Palisade webinar, Max Shlopak, strategic delivery leader and former Oracle senior manager at LMS, said there was a general trend of Oracle wanting to create doubt over licensing during the transition to the cloud.

"Oracle wants all the customers, all of its customers, to move to Oracle Cloud, and they try to create all kinds of roadblocks that could scare customers from going to any other cloud provider. For example, [they might say] you need double the number of licenses, as they have in some white papers. They might say you can't go to that cloud because you can't get support from Oracle for deployments. The list goes on and on. Most of it – if not all of it – really amounts to fear, uncertainty and doubt that they're trying to create.

"The reality for all the customers is that they need to really go back to what is in their contracts with Oracle. Not Oracle's interpretation, especially interpretation of wisdom from their sales teams, but actual Oracle actual contracts in black and white." ®

Similar topics

Broader topics

Other stories you might like

  • Experts: AI should be recognized as inventors in patent law
    Plus: Police release deepfake of murdered teen in cold case, and more

    In-brief Governments around the world should pass intellectual property laws that grant rights to AI systems, two academics at the University of New South Wales in Australia argued.

    Alexandra George, and Toby Walsh, professors of law and AI, respectively, believe failing to recognize machines as inventors could have long-lasting impacts on economies and societies. 

    "If courts and governments decide that AI-made inventions cannot be patented, the implications could be huge," they wrote in a comment article published in Nature. "Funders and businesses would be less incentivized to pursue useful research using AI inventors when a return on their investment could be limited. Society could miss out on the development of worthwhile and life-saving inventions."

    Continue reading
  • Declassified and released: More secret files on US govt's emergency doomsday powers
    Nuke incoming? Quick break out the plans for rationing, censorship, property seizures, and more

    More papers describing the orders and messages the US President can issue in the event of apocalyptic crises, such as a devastating nuclear attack, have been declassified and released for all to see.

    These government files are part of a larger collection of records that discuss the nature, reach, and use of secret Presidential Emergency Action Documents: these are executive orders, announcements, and statements to Congress that are all ready to sign and send out as soon as a doomsday scenario occurs. PEADs are supposed to give America's commander-in-chief immediate extraordinary powers to overcome extraordinary events.

    PEADs have never been declassified or revealed before. They remain hush-hush, and their exact details are not publicly known.

    Continue reading
  • Stolen university credentials up for sale by Russian crooks, FBI warns
    Forget dark-web souks, thousands of these are already being traded on public bazaars

    Russian crooks are selling network credentials and virtual private network access for a "multitude" of US universities and colleges on criminal marketplaces, according to the FBI.

    According to a warning issued on Thursday, these stolen credentials sell for thousands of dollars on both dark web and public internet forums, and could lead to subsequent cyberattacks against individual employees or the schools themselves.

    "The exposure of usernames and passwords can lead to brute force credential stuffing computer network attacks, whereby attackers attempt logins across various internet sites or exploit them for subsequent cyber attacks as criminal actors take advantage of users recycling the same credentials across multiple accounts, internet sites, and services," the Feds' alert [PDF] said.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022