They didn't explicitly or even implicitly state Oracle has any connection to the activity, only that the dude is/was employed by Oracle. That part is presumably

They didn't explicitly or even implicitly state Oracle has any connection to the activity, only that the dude is/was employed by Oracle. That part is presumably true and therefore not actionable. If, however, Oracle could prove the only reason that info was included was out of "malice", they'd have a case but that's typically an extremely high bar to clear.