Infor wants from the client $400 thousand for licenses: the client against

Producer of special alloys, ATI Ladish company, last week took with the claim district court of East District of State of Wisconsin, USA, against Infor company – developer and the supplier of business applications.

The essence of the claim is that the predecessor of ATI Ladish company - Ladish Co. Inc., signed with Infor the license agreement about initial contribution in the amount of $82 thousand for installation of a packet of business applications in November, 2005. In May of the current year Ladish integrated with subsidiary company of the same group, producer of Allegheny Technologies Inc metals, and the united company was merged with other division of ATI, ATI Ladish was as a result created.

ATI Ladish "is a legal successor and the owner of all property, the rights, privileges, powers and franchizes of the companies predecessors and also bears responsibility of execution on all debts and obligations of the companies", reported in the statement of claim.

However, in July the accountant officer of Infor contacted ATI Ladish and assumed that merge is not that case when it is not necessary to pay. Afterwards the department of legal providing Infor company reported to ATI Ladish that in merge violation of the license agreement therefore additional payments are necessary is.

After a number of meetings and message exchange, in August the culmination requirement of Infor company about collection from ATI Ladish followed nearly $400 thousand "payments for assignment of rights".

ATI Ladish specified in the petition that taking into account "absurdity of the payments demanded by Infor company which more than exceed the original cost of purchase four times it is clear that any commercial trial is impossible".

Infor has "a business model within which she makes obviously unreasonable agreement breaches, making the complaint based on different license agreements and requiring additional runtime royalty fees for correction of allegedly present violations", said in the statement of claim ATI Ladish.

This claim the company requires the explanatory judgment that ATI Ladish is not responsible for any additional charges, also as well as expenses on the lawyer and "other judicial protection which the court will consider proper in these circumstances".

The representative of Infor company in the short statement on Tuesday noted that ATI Ladish "is a valuable client, and the company works as a private order on leading this question to the fast and satisfying solution".

Recently Infor faced the similar claim from other client, producer of textile products, BMP America. This company in February filed a lawsuit on vendor, stating that it is not obliged to pay about $150 thousand licensing fees which the developer company after carrying out license audit demanded.

The analyst Ray Wang, the CEO of Constellation Research company, noted concerning a case with ATI that in software license agreements it is always necessary to consider merges and sales. "It is necessary to predeterminate who owns the software and that will occur [in case of merge] because it is a part of corporate life", - the analyst emphasized.