Customise Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorised as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyse the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customised advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyse the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Infosys accuses Cognizant of anti-competitive practices in Texas court battle

India’s IT giant Infosys has filed a counterclaim in a Texas federal court against US-based rival Cognizant, alleging anti-competitive practices, intellectual property misuse, and targeted recruitment of senior executives. The case, which marks the latest escalation in a growing rivalry between the two technology heavyweights, could have significant implications for the global IT outsourcing industry.

In its filing, Infosys, India’s second-largest software services provider, accused Cognizant of including restrictive clauses in client contracts designed to block them from awarding IT outsourcing projects to competitors. The Bengaluru-based company further claimed that Cognizant deliberately withheld training on its proprietary software, limiting other firms’ ability to compete effectively.

Infosys also alleged that Cognizant engaged in targeted recruitment of key personnel, including the hiring of former Infosys executive S. Ravi Kumar as CEO in 2023. According to Infosys, this move delayed its ability to develop a competing software platform, Infosys Helix, aimed at the healthcare technology sector.

In response, Cognizant dismissed the accusations, stating: “Cognizant encourages fair competition, but competitors cannot use Cognizant’s IP to unfairly compete, as Infosys has done.” The U.S.-based company pledged to take decisive action to address the allegations.

Infosys has yet to issue a public comment regarding the case.

The counterclaim comes in response to a lawsuit filed last August by Cognizant subsidiary TriZetto. The healthcare technology provider accused Infosys of misappropriating trade secrets related to its flagship software platforms, Facets and QNXT, widely used by healthcare insurers for automating administrative tasks.

TriZetto alleged that Infosys improperly utilised its software to develop a competing product, “Test Cases for Facets,” which it claimed repackaged proprietary data into Infosys’s own offering. 

Infosys’s counterclaim seeks three times the damages it alleges to have suffered, along with legal fees and associated costs, though the exact amount has not been disclosed.

The legal battle, filed under the case name ‘Cognizant TriZetto Software Group Inc v. Infosys Ltd’ (Case No. 3:24-cv-02158-X), is being heard in the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas. It represents the latest flashpoint in a broader struggle for dominance in the IT outsourcing and healthcare technology markets.

With Cognizant and Infosys competing to secure major contracts in the lucrative healthcare sector, the case could set a precedent for how intellectual property disputes and anti-competitive practices are addressed in the global software industry.

As both companies defend their positions, the outcome could influence the strategies of IT service providers navigating increasingly competitive and regulated markets.

Previous Article

Zuckerberg urges Trump to defend US tech giants from EU antitrust penalties

Next Article

NUS, Northern Trustand UOB collaborate on blockchain-based green bond tokenisation




Related News