I don't think you can license block a valid research paper. That's like Ford saying you can't verify its emissions claims. Gag orders like that on products/services are not generally legal, even if the terms say you agree to it. You could get sued out the ass for slander or libel though if there are flaws in either your experimentation methods or research analysis.
It is REALLY difficult to benchmark to the companies standards in such a way that you won't get sued.
Here's a paper on Oracle technology already. http://www.iisocialcom.org/conference/passat2012/PASSATProceedings/data/4578b119.pdf
"I am not keen on digging through boring license stuff" Well maybe you should be keen if you're afraid of getting sued.
Here's an oracle license from July. Quick glance, i see no restriction. http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E11882_01/license.112/e10594.pdf
Unless you state the specific technology down to the version or link to the license/terms of use, we cannot specifically say.
Here is an interesting read on the "gag" policies, but it's from 2007.
http://genellebelmas.com/documents/Belmas-Larson-Clicking%20away.pdf
Notable in the conclusion:
First Amendment jurisprudence provides considerable support to
the concept of a right to hear. Using the First Amendment to attack
gagwrap clauses directly would require that state action be found
first. Even without state action, however, the First Amendment provides a significant public policy basis upon which gagwrap clauses
might be found to be unenforceable. It remains to be seen how this
public policy rationale will work with the Restatement of Contracts
framework when evaluating gagwrap clauses.