backtop


Print 110 comment(s) - last by uibo.. on Nov 7 at 5:35 AM


New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo  (Source: Groll/AP)
“We intend to stop them" -- New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo

Intel is no stranger to lawsuits. The company was slapped with a $1.45B USD fine by the EU in May of this year for anticompetitive practices. The charges leveled against Intel mainly focused on illegal methods Intel used to keep AMD from gaining in traction in the marketplace.

At the time, EU competition commissioner Neelie Kroes noted that, "[Intel used] used illegal anticompetitive practices to exclude its only competitor and reduce consumers’ choice — and the whole story is about consumers."

The Santa Clara, CA-based company later appealed the ruling with Intel spokesman Chuck Malloy saying, "Our position is that the decision was wrong and we said that from the day it was announced. It was wrong on many levels."

Now it appears that Intel is facing another lawsuit -- this time on its own home soil according to the New York Times. New York attorney general Andrew M. Cuomo is going after Intel this time with a federal antitrust lawsuit. Like the aforementioned EU case, Cuomo asserts that Intel used illegal tactics to stifle AMD.

“Rather than compete fairly, Intel used bribery and coercion to maintain a stranglehold on the market,” said Cuomo. “Intel’s actions not only unfairly restricted potential competitors, but also hurt average consumers who were robbed of better products and lower prices.”

The NYT adds that the state of NY's action against Intel could mean that the FTC could step in as well with charges of its own. "These are separate investigations, but it would be very surprising for New York State to go off on its own without being fairly confident the FTC would pursue Intel as well," a person familiar with the situation told the NYT.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Fines fines fines
By silverblue on 11/4/2009 12:57:38 PM , Rating: 2
So far, none of it has gone to AMD's coffers. Only time will tell how much Intel will get fined, and what proportion of this is paid to AMD.


RE: Fines fines fines
By Motoman on 11/4/2009 1:09:32 PM , Rating: 2
IANAL, but in these cases I don't think any of it does.

I think the only way AMD could actually get money out of this would be to file a civil suit after the criminal suit for their own damages.


RE: Fines fines fines
By othercents on 11/4/2009 4:01:29 PM , Rating: 3
AMD was building a plant in New York and I bet it was subsidized by New York. They spun off the plant to GlobalFoundaries, but I would bet that any money New York gets will help offset the cost of building that plant.

Other


RE: Fines fines fines
By RW on 11/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Fines fines fines
By RW on 11/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Fines fines fines
By exploderator on 11/4/2009 6:15:41 PM , Rating: 2
No, honestly working fairly within the rules of law and sound ethics is what makes us something other than monkeys.

We doubtless enjoy the fruits of our giant companies, but it is not sustainable if there is nothing to FORCE them to behave ethically, which they will not do themselves . Look what happened when Wall Street got exactly what it wanted: they went way too far, right off a cliff.

Intel is far from the worst, but we cannot allow a lord of the flies mentality to rule the mega-corporate environment. All the little peons DO get squashed when they swagger around, out of control, drunk on unrestrained profit and power.


RE: Fines fines fines
By RW on 11/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Fines fines fines
By nuarbnellaffej on 11/4/2009 7:41:38 PM , Rating: 2
I love capitalism as much as the next guy, but there is a line, Intel was using bribery, illegal kickbacks and other cohesion's to get OEM's to use Intel chips, and threatening them if they used AMD chips.

That is clearly illegal, and I wouldn't categorize it as the free market.


RE: Fines fines fines
By RW on 11/4/09, Rating: -1
RE: Fines fines fines
By caqde on 11/5/2009 1:38:32 AM , Rating: 2
True you can't force the customers to buy your product, but your argument about not buying one is purely ignorant. I will never understand this line of thinking. Not to mention most of your consumers are not going to know anything about these issues or for that matter care so your choice argument is an illusion. It is like an election with one party, someone has to be voted in and someone is going to vote for him whether you choose to vote for him or not he is still getting voted in.


RE: Fines fines fines
By nuarbnellaffej on 11/5/2009 8:45:23 PM , Rating: 1
What the heck would they do if they owned a business, and needed to upgrade their computers? nothing? It hasn't been proven, but if it is proven that intel used illegal means to stop OEM's from buying AMD chips, than they deserve to be fined.


RE: Fines fines fines
By hyvonen on 11/5/2009 3:05:20 AM , Rating: 2
And you can prove this how?

Let's just wait for the court to decide if this really happened or not.


RE: Fines fines fines
By nuarbnellaffej on 11/5/2009 8:52:28 PM , Rating: 2
Well of course I cannot prove anything on that matter, but that's not what I'm arguing, what I'm saying is that if they are using illegal tactics to stop OEM's from using AMD chips than they deserve to be fined for it.


RE: Fines fines fines
By Reclaimer77 on 11/5/2009 3:34:32 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I love capitalism as much as the next guy, but there is a line, Intel was using bribery, illegal kickbacks and other cohesion's to get OEM's to use Intel chips, and threatening them if they used AMD chips.


You know, it's amazing that none, NONE, of those "threatened" OEM companies filed a suit or even complained against Intel. But I guess in Fantasy World, multi-billion dollar corporations just sit back and let other corparations bully, threaten, and tell them how to run things...


RE: Fines fines fines
By Khato on 11/5/2009 3:57:36 AM , Rating: 2
Heh, probably because an actual Intel 'threat' wouldn't be to reduce rebates in proportion to the lesser number of units sold, it would be along the lines of "If you go AMD, then we're going to cap the number of processors that we'll sell to you at X% of your current." Why? Because back during the days that AMD had a competitive advantage, they were capacity constrained and wouldn't be able to fill demand if Intel cut back drastically.

But, oh yeah, Intel didn't do anything of the sort. If you actually take the time to read the complaint (it's only 83 pages, with double line-spacing no less!) you'll see what I mean. And taken in that context, the majority of the so-called 'evidence' from system manufacturers doesn't do anything to implicate Intel in any wrongdoing. Rather, it's a bunch of "Intel could completely screw us if they wanted to, so we're going to do what we can to make them happy."

The other point that I always enjoy bringing up - no judicial body has found Intel guilty as of yet.


RE: Fines fines fines
By HrilL on 11/5/2009 7:00:36 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe because Intel destroyed thousands of emails and documents of evidence. Clearly this was brought up during the investigations. The European Union found this to be the case and as did the South Korean government.

From what I've read before it was intel's control of their chipsets that scared the OEMs. Intel would sell you X amount of CPU's but if you also sold AMD then they wouldn't sell you the chipsets you needed to make those Intel CPU's function.


RE: Fines fines fines
By theapparition on 11/4/2009 5:24:16 PM , Rating: 2
Bingo,
We have a winner.


RE: Fines fines fines
By knutjb on 11/4/2009 6:04:36 PM , Rating: 2
You might want to go back and check your time lines. This started before AMD planned to move to NY. Your conspiracy theory needs more work.


RE: Fines fines fines
By Khato on 11/5/2009 2:41:07 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, you might want to go do that...

January 10th, 2008 - http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/proces...

May 3rd, 2007 - http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/display/2007050...


RE: Fines fines fines
By knutjb on 11/5/2009 11:24:10 AM , Rating: 2
Intel started this illegal activity during the P4-XP days and that was when?


RE: Fines fines fines
By HrilL on 11/5/2009 7:04:30 PM , Rating: 2
Before that. They were doing this during the P2 days and before that even. When AMD's K6-2 was still the better CPU on the market... I think it started as soon as AMD started to design their own CPUs based on x86 and were mixing in some aspects of the RISC processors of the company they had purchased.


"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki