UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANATERRE HAUTE

DIVISION
U N I O N H O S P I T A L ,
I N C . , ) )P l a i n t i f f , )
C a s e N o . 2 : 1 4 - c v -
4 5 )v
s .
) )A T T A C H M A T E
C O R P O R A T I O N ,
) )D e f e n d a n t .
)
COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff, Union Hospital, Inc. (Union Hospital), brings this action against
DefendantAttachmate Corporation (Attachmate), and states as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. Si nce at l eas t 1997, Uni on Hos pi t al , a not - f or - pr of i t r egi onal hos pi t al ,
has beenl i cens ed t o us e At t achmat e s of t war e f or whi ch i t pai d t ens of
t hous ands of dol l ar s . I n 2013, At t achmat e conduct ed an audi t of Uni on
Hos pi t al s us e of At t achmat e s of t war e pr oduct s . Despite the fact that the audit
revealed that in most instances Union Hospitals actual usage didnot exceed the
licenses purchased, Attachmate, for the first time, alleged that Union Hospital hadused the
software beyond the alleged terms of the licenses and demanded that Union
Hospital pay Attachmate over $2,000,000 in license fees, interest and other charges. Consistent
with itshi s t or y and r eput at i on wi t h ot her cus t omer s , At t achmat e has
t hr eat ened t o i ni t i at e l i t i gat i onagai ns t Uni on Hos pi t al . Uni on Hos pi t al
di s agr ees wi t h bot h t he char ge of l i abi l i t y and t hee x i s t e n c e a n d
e x t e n t o f A t t a c h m a t e s a l l e g e d d a m a g e s . T h e r e f o r e , t o
r e s o l v e t h e s e disagreements, Union Hospital brings this Complaint for declaratory and
other relief.
Case 2:14-cv-00045-JMS-WGH Document 1 Filed 02/19/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1
P r o v i e y : Overhauser Law Offices
LLC www.iniplaw.org www.overhauser.com




2

2
THE PARTIES
2. Pl ai nt i f f , Uni on Hos pi t al , i s a not - f or - pr of i t I ndi ana cor por at i on whos e
pr i nci pal place of business is Terre Haute, Indiana.3 . A s a n o t - f o r - p r o f i t
r e g i o n a l h o s p i t a l , U n i o n H o s p i t a l e x i s t s t o
p r o v i d e compassionate healthcare to all residents of the Wabash Valley
community, regardless of their ability to pay. Further, as a not-for-profit, all excess
revenues of Union Hospital are reinvestedin the community it serves.4 . De f e n d a n t ,
At t a c h ma t e , i s a Wa s h i n g t o n c o r p o r a t i o n wh o s e p r i n c i p a l p l a c e
o f business is located in Seattle, Washington.5. Accor di ng t o i t s webs i t e,
At t achmat e i s one of t he l ar ges t PC s of t war e compani es i n t h e wo r l d ,
wi t h 4 0 o f f i c e s d o i n g b u s i n e s s i n 1 4 5 c o u n t r i e s a r o u n d t h e wo r l d .
I n 2 0 1 1 , Attachmate purchased Novell for 2.2 billion dollars. Upon information
and belief, Attachmate isone of four business units in a privately held enterprise
software holding company called TheAttachmate Group.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
6 . T h e r e i s a c a s e o f a c t u a l c o n t r o v e r s y b e t we e n t h e p a r t i e s f o r
wh i c h d e c l a r a t o r y relief is sought, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2201 and 2202,
regarding their respective rights andother legal relations arising under the
Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq.7 . T h i s Co u r t h a s o r i g i n a l s u b j e c t
ma t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h i s a c t i o n u n d e r t h e following statutes: 28
U.S.C. 1331, in that this is an action arising under the laws of the UnitedStates;
28 U.S.C. 1332, in that the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of
$75,000,excl us i ve of i nt er es t and cos t s , and Uni on Hos pi t al and
At t achmat e ar e ci t i z ens of di f f er ent states; 28 U.S.C. 1338(a), in that this is a
civil action arising under an Act of Congress relatingto copyrights; and U.S.C.
1367, because these claims are so related to the claims in the action
Case 2:14-cv-00045-JMS-WGH Document 1 Filed 02/19/14 Page 2 of 12 PageID #: 2

3within this Courts original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or
controversy under Article III of the United States Constitution8 . Th e p a r t i e s
d i s p u t e i s a n a c t u a l c o n t r o v e r s y e x i s t i n g b e t we e n p a r t i e s
h a v i n g adver s e l egal i nt er es t s and i s of s uf f i ci ent i mmedi acy and r eal i t y
t o war r ant t he i s s uance of adeclaratory judgment.9. The Cour t has j ur i s di ct i on
over At t achmat e pur s uant t o I ndi ana Tr i al Rul e 4. 4( A) . 10. Attachmate has
purposefully directed its activities toward residents of Indiana andotherwise
purposefully availed itself of the privileges of conducting activities within
Indiana,thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws. Additionally,
Attachmate is registered todo business in Indiana.11. Venue i n t hi s Cour t i s pr oper
pur s uant t o 28 U. S. C. 1391 and 1400( a) . 12. For venue pur pos es ,
At t achmat e r es i des i n t hi s j udi ci al di s t r i ct . At t he t i me t hi s action is being
commenced, Attachmate is subject to personal jurisdiction in Indiana and in
this judicial district.1 3 . A s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t o f t h e e v e n t s o r o mi s s i o n s
g i v i n g r i s e t o Un i o n H o s p i t a l s claims occurred within this judicial district with
respect to this civil action.
THE FACTS

3
14. Uni on Hos pi t al has us ed At t achmat e s of t war e pr oduct s f or many year s
pur s uant to its various licenses without complaint from Attachmate.15. Dur i ng t he t i me
t hat Uni on Hos pi t al us ed t he l i cens es f or At t achmat e s of t war e, these products
have been marketed under different names, including various versions of productsnamed
EXTRA! and Reflection.16. Unt i l Augus t 2013, Uni on Hos pi t al cannot
r ecal l At t achmat e ever r eques t i ng anaudit of Union Hospitals computer systems for
licensing compliance.
Case 2:14-cv-00045-JMS-WGH Document 1 Filed 02/19/14 Page 3 of 12 PageID #: 3
41 7 . T h e r e a f t e r , i n N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 3 , A t t a c h m a t e
p r o v i d e d t o U n i o n H o s p i t a l spreadsheet data showing the alleged
shortfalls in the number of purchased licenses claimed byAttachmate for its various
software products.18. Thr ough cor r es pondence bet ween t he par t i es f r om
November 2013 t o t he pr es ent , Attachmate demanded that Union Hospital pay
Attachmate over $2 million in license fees, pre- judgment interest at a 12% interest rate
dating back for over ten years, and other costs.1 9 . Un i o n Ho s p i t a l d i s p u t e s
s e v e r a l o f t h e g r o u n d s o n wh i c h At t a c h ma t e b a s e s i t s claims for
payment.20. Accor di ng t o At t achmat e s s pr eads heet dat a f r om whi ch i t
cal cul at es t he al l egedlicense shortfalls, the vast majority of alleged over-
deployments was for the EXTRA! PersonalClient.21. Attachmate based its claim of
over-deployment of this software item, not upon theactual usage of Attachmates
product, but upon the potential total number of users who couldhave used
Attachmate software on Union Hospitals Citrix server regardless of whether the
user e v e r a c c e s s e d o r u s e d t h e p r o d u c t . T h i s i s a c o mmo n s c h e me
u t i l i z e d b y At t a c h ma t e i n a n attempt to reap windfall profits from its customers.2 2 .
I n f a c t , a c t u a l a c c e s s t o a n d u s e o f A t t a c h m a t e s EXT RA!
s o f t wa r e b y Un i o n Hospital personnel is far less than estimated by Attachmate.2 3 . I n
r e s p o n s e t o At t a c h m a t e s c l a i m t h a t i t s a u d i t r e v e a l e d Un i o n
Ho s p i t a l h a d d e p l o y e d m o r e u n i t s o f A t t a c h m a t e s s o f t w a r e
t h a n a l l o w e d b y t h e r e s p e c t i v e l i c e n s e agreements, Union Hospital
immediately corrected the problem so that only those users withlicenses for
Attachmates software and who actually used it had access to it on Union
HospitalsCitrix server.
Case 2:14-cv-00045-JMS-WGH Document 1 Filed 02/19/14 Page 4 of 12 PageID #: 4
524. Never t hel es s , At t achmat e cont i nued t o i ns i s t t hat Uni on Hos pi t al
pur chas e over athousand more licenses for units of Attachmate software than Union
Hospital was using or wouldever require plus maintenance fees and interest.25. Dur i ng t he
cour s e of t he par t i es di s cus s i ons , At t achmat e s r epr es ent at i ves
haveexpressly or impliedly threatened litigation for breach of contract and/or
copyright infringementif the parties could not resolve their differences.26. Upon
i nf or mat i on and bel i ef , At t achmat e has a document ed hi s t or y of
pr edat or yenf or cement agai ns t i t s cus t omer s : f ai l i ng t o conduct an audi t
f or year s , al l egi ng copyr i ght i nf r i ngement and br each of cont r act bas ed
upon pot ent i al r at her t han act ual us age, and t hent h r e a t e n i n g a n d
b r i n g i n g c l a i ms a g a i n s t c u s t o me r s wh o r e f u s e t o p a y wi n d f a l l
p r o f i t s t o At t a c h ma t e f o r a l l e g e d o v e r - a c c e s s ( n o t o v e r u s e ) o f i t s
At t a c h ma t e s o f t wa r e p r o d u c t s . Cu s t o me r s a g a i n s t wh o m At t a c h ma t e

4
h a s l i t i g a t e d a g a i n s t i n c l u d e a t l e a s t : No r t h we s t Community Hospital
(Case No. 1:11-cv-06915, United States District Court for the NorthernDistrict of
Illinois); Tarmac Ltd. (Case No. 2:08-cv-01370, United States District Court for
theWestern District of Washington); Sentry Insurance (Case No. 2:08-cv-01035-RAJ, United
StatesDistrict Court for the Western District of Washington); Jeld-Wen Inc. (Case
No. 2:08-cv-00897-MJP, United States District Court for the Western District of
Washington); United TechnologiesCorp. (Case No. 2:08-cv-00799-RSL, United States
District Court for the Western District of Washington); Windstream
Communications Inc. (Case No. 2:08-cv-00190-RSM, United StatesDistrict Court for
the Western District of Washington); Dell Inc. (Case No. 2:07-cv-00283-MAT,United States
District Court for the Western District of Washington); Juniper Networks,
Inc.( Ca s e No . 2 : 0 7 - c v - 0 0 8 0 2 - RS M, Un i t e d S t a t e s Di s t r i c t Co u r t f o r
t h e We s t e r n Di s t r i c t o f Washington); Carnival Corporation (Case No. 2:07-
cv-01730-MJP, United States District Court
Case 2:14-cv-00045-JMS-WGH Document 1 Filed 02/19/14 Page 5 of 12 PageID #: 5
6for the Western District of Washington); Health Net, Inc. (Case No. 2:09-cv-
01161-MJP, UnitedStates District Court for the Western District of Washington); Public
Heath Trust of Miami-DadeCounty Florida d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital (Case No.
2:09-cv-01180-JLR, United StatesDistrict Court for the Western District of
Washington); Celcom Axiata Berhad (Case No. 2:10-cv-00526-RSM, United States
District Court for the Western District of Washington); and others.2 7 . Un i o n Ho s p i t a l s
p r e l i mi n a r y i n q u i r y r e v e a l s t h a t t h e o n l i n e d a t a b a s e o f t h e United
States Copyright Office suggests that some of Attachmates alleged copyrights were
nottimely registered and therefore Attachmate is not entitled to claim statutory
damages or to anaward of attorneys fees for those particular registrations.
See
1 7 U. S . C 4 1 2 . F o r e x a mp l e , Union Hospital was unable to find any copyright
registration for EXTRA! X-treme v. 9.3.2 8 . Al l c o n d i t i o n s p r e c e d e n t t o t h e
p r o s e c u t i o n o f Un i o n Ho s p i t a l s c l a i ms h a v e occurred, have been
performed, or have been excused or waived.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION(Declaratory Judgment on Copyright Infringement Claims)
2 9 . Un i o n Ho s p i t a l r e p e a t s a n d r e - a l l e g e s b y r e f e r e n c e P a r a g r a p h s
1 t h r o u g h 2 8 o f this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.30. The di s put e cr eat ed
by At t achmat e s r epeat ed cl ai ms as t o t he s of t war e l i cens i ngis an actual,
substantial, and justiciable controversy between the parties requiring resolution
bythe Court.3 1 . Up o n i n f o r ma t i o n a n d b e l i e f , At t a c h ma t e c o n t e n d s
t h a t Un i o n Ho s p i t a l h a s infringed on Attachmates copyrights including:a. EXTRA!
Per s onal Cl i ent 6. 7, Copyr i ght Regi s t r at i on No. TX0005717997(registered on
March 26, 2002);
Case 2:14-cv-00045-JMS-WGH Document 1 Filed 02/19/14 Page 6 of 12 PageID #: 6