The final penalty on TCS could be much lower as an order of the District Court Judge of Wisconsin differs from the jury’s findings.
According to Judge William Conley’s order, seen by BusinessLine , Epic Systems, the company that had filed the plea against TCS, may not have provided enough evidence to claim damages.
“Indeed, the only evidence that the defendants (TCS) actually used any of the confidential information downloaded from its (Epic Systems’) UserWeb is an already fairly dated general comparison of modules available in Epic’s software and a more rudimentary software product sold by TCS in India called “Med Mantra,” as well as a related discussion.
The remainder is based on Epic’s speculation that the confidential information is sitting on a shelf somewhere to be used immediately after this trial ends,” the 14-page order given on Thursday, a day ahead of the jury’s verdict, stated.
“Not only has Epic been unable to proffer any evidence that this comparison was in fact used in some way to improve the Med Mantra product (or, for that matter, other TCS products now being marketed in India, Africa and apparently the Middle East), but there is no evidence of any kind that the bulk of the other confidential information downloaded by TCS and principally used to support a service contract for Epic’s software use by a mutual client, Kaiser Permanente, found its way to anyone on the Med Mantra or other TCS HIS team member actually engaged in the development of that software,” Judge Conley added.
TCS on Friday was slapped with a $940 million trade secrets verdict in Wisconsin, including $700 million in punitive damages, for allegedly stealing information related to US-based Epic Systems’ healthcare software. TCS, however, denied the charges and said it would appeal.
Epic filed the case against TCS in 2014 with allegations that TCS illicitly downloaded documentation for software it had been hired to help install at Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, accusing TCS of “brazenly stealing” confidential information and trade secrets in order to help its competing healthcare software provider, Med Mantra. An amended complaint was later filed in 2015.