Redress Compliance provides software license audit defense led by former Oracle and IBM auditors. We control the response, rebuild the claim on your evidence and negotiate the settlement for Oracle, IBM, SAP, Microsoft and Broadcom audits, on a fixed fee.
Software license audit defense from Redress Compliance is led by former vendor auditors who now work only for buyers. When Oracle, IBM, SAP, Microsoft or Broadcom opens an audit, we control the response, rebuild the claim on your evidence and negotiate the settlement. The fee is fixed up front, and you pay only what the evidence supports.
Software license audit defense starts the day a vendor or its auditor makes contact: a data request, a questionnaire, or findings with a settlement figure attached. The opening number is built on worst case assumptions, and how the first weeks are run decides where it lands.
Our founders ran audit and licensing engagements on the vendor side, at Oracle license management services and at IBM. They know how a claim is assembled, which assumptions inflate it, and which evidence takes it apart.
They start high because the vendor sets every assumption in its own favor until someone challenges it. The same patterns inflate claims across vendors:
Compliance gaps also accumulate before any letter: virtualization, disaster recovery and metric changes create exposure nobody measured, and evidence sits scattered, so even correct positions cannot be proven.
A partner leads every audit defense from the first letter to the signed settlement. Both founders worked audits from the vendor side before founding Redress, which is why we read the letter the way the auditor wrote it.
Fredrik co founded Redress Compliance in 2018 and serves as Group CEO. His career began at Oracle, running audit and compliance engagements for Fortune 500 customers in license management services, followed by senior commercial roles at IBM and SAP. He leads the Oracle practice and the most complex multi vendor engagements.
Morten co founded Redress Compliance after senior commercial and licensing roles at IBM and Oracle. At IBM he ran enterprise licensing and audit engagements for some of the largest financial services and industrial accounts in EMEA. He leads the Vendor Shield subscription and partners on the largest IBM, Oracle, and cross publisher renewals.
Vendor specialists join where the estate needs them, including Piaras McDonnell (IBM Practice Lead), who leads mainframe and middleware audit defense. See the Redress management team.
It runs protocol first: control the channel, build your own number, then challenge theirs. The response protocol is delivered within 3 business days of engagement start.
| Deliverable | What it contains |
|---|---|
| Response protocol | Who speaks to the auditor, what is shared, in what order, and what is never volunteered. |
| Scope letter | The written perimeter: entities, countries, period and products covered by the audit. |
| Independent license position | Your own entitlement and deployment count, built before any data leaves the building. |
| Written finding responses | Each claimed finding answered with contract language and evidence. |
| Settlement review | The settlement terms and release language checked before signature. |
The auditors changed, and so did what they count. These are the shifts documented in current Redress research:
One constant held: audits where the defense engaged in week one settled 15 to 25 percent lower than those where the buyer waited 30 days or more.
Four published audit outcomes across Oracle Java and IBM, each documented on its case study page:
Oracle opened a $20M Java claim against Kroger. It closed at zero cost.
✓ Published case studyAvis Budget Group took a $4.7M Oracle Java claim to zero in ninety days.
✓ Published case studyA New York financial institution cut claimed IBM audit exposure by 90 percent before settlement.
✓ Published case studyA $5M Java claim against a five thousand employee group closed at zero, with price protection in the renewal.
The best defender is one with no stake in what you buy to settle. A neutral comparison of the usual options:
| Question | Independent advisor (Redress) | Big Four consultancy | Reseller or vendor partner | In house team |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Independence | Zero vendor affiliations, no reseller agreements, no referral fees | Advisory sits alongside implementation practices and publisher alliance programs | Commercial partner of the vendor, paid through margin or partner programs | Fully yours |
| Conflicts of interest | None from vendor revenue; paid only by the client | Implementation and alliance revenue on the same products can pull against a hard position | Earns more when you buy more | None, though bandwidth is limited |
| Vendor specific experience | Founders ex Oracle, IBM and SAP; practice leads ex Microsoft and ex SAP; 11 vendor practices | Broad coverage; depth varies by team and engagement | Deep product knowledge, seen from the selling side | Deep on your own estate; sees each vendor event once every few years |
| Market view for audit settlements | Benchmarks from comparable closed deals across 500+ enterprise clients | Varies by practice | Sees pricing from the vendor side | Your own history and last quote |
| How fees work | Fixed fee agreed up front, or 25 percent of savings on negotiation work; never hourly | Advisory fees, often alongside implementation work | Often no separate fee; paid through the transaction | Salary and opportunity cost |
Our independent versus Big Four comparison covers the conflict questions to put to any firm before an audit.
Audit defense runs on a fixed fee, scoped to the vendor and the audit and agreed up front. The cost is known on day one, while the claim is not.
We never bill by the hour, so a long audit does not raise the fee. If the settlement turns into a renewal or purchase negotiation, that part can run on a success fee. It is 25 percent of what we save you, with nothing to pay if we save nothing.
Control the information flow: acknowledge the letter professionally, commit to nothing, and route every response through review. Our response protocol is delivered within 3 business days of engagement start.
Audit defense runs on a fixed fee, scoped to the audit and agreed before we start, so the cost is known while the claim is not. We never bill by the hour. If the settlement rolls into a renewal or purchase negotiation, that negotiation can run on a 25 percent success fee.
We defend Oracle and Java, IBM, SAP, Microsoft, Broadcom VMware, ServiceNow and the wider stack. Each vendor has a dedicated audit defense service behind this practice, with its own specialists.
Opening claims usually shrink materially once they meet evidence. Published outcomes include a $20M Kroger Java claim and a $4.7M Avis Budget Group claim, both closed at zero. A New York financial institution cut claimed IBM exposure by 90 percent.
It depends on the vendor and the scope, but the first week matters most. The Avis Budget Group Java claim went from $4.7M to zero in ninety days. Redress research found that defenses started 30 days or more after the letter settled 15 to 25 percent higher.
Share data only after scope is agreed in writing and your own position is built. Every matter in our Java research that closed without payment had a written, dated scope acceptance on file before deployment data moved.
Yes, and it changes the first week of any audit. We build an effective license position per vendor, sequence remediation on your timing, and assemble the evidence file that makes the position defensible.
Yes: zero vendor affiliations, no reseller agreements and no referral fees. No audit outcome and no resulting purchase earns us anything from the vendor.
Baselines, benchmarks, and execution from the practice behind 500+ enterprise clients.
One letter a month. Negotiation moves, audit signals, and price book shifts.