We all pay 'rentier taxation'
Oracle's behaviour exemplifies ills created by misconceived introduction of legalised monopoly into commerce and manufacture. Although some believe otherwise, rentier economics is inimical to market-capitalism of the nature construed by Adam Smith.
Ill-effects arise from pricing being arbitrary. The underlying logic is price adjustment to maximise overall profit from those willing to pay. This replaces the 'price discovery' offered by competition in an open market.
Rentiers within the field of digitised (or digitisable) products are in extremely privileged position. They vend products which inherently lack scarcity because they have no physical substance other than that of any medium in which they might be embedded in any one instance. The most abstract example is an idea itself even should expression of that idea lead to a tangible physical artifice.
The monstrous monopoly pervades almost all aspects of culture ranging from recorded caterwauling of 'pop singers' to presentation of (occasionally) deep ideas in academic literature. The ersatz nature of monopoly 'competition' requires bolstering by an army of investigators and lawyers whose cost is factored into the prices of rentier goods.
Every citizen and aggregate body (e.g. government) feeds rentiers. Even when not buying an overtly rentier product, it is highly likely that somewhere in the cost of its making, payment has been handed to rentiers; for example, few businesses these days are not reliant upon proprietary computer software. Although it qualitatively is a different form of rentier economics, rental of office and retail premises is an identifiable component of price for many things; physical rental does broadly conform to supply/demand economics but contains huge distortions favourable to landlords.
Whereas markets determine price of many goods and services, there is no mechanism for external price restraint to be imposed upon vendors of digital goods which inhabit walled gardens,