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

By superPC on 11/4/2009 5:37:58 PM , Rating: 2
correct me if i'm wrong but didn't X86 license (which is own by intel by the way) stipulate that holder of that license should not exceed a set percentage of CPU sales (20% if i remember correctly). i can't give any reference offhand, still trying to find it. if it's true, then no lawsuit can help AMD because the stipulation of X86 license guarantied that AMD will not make more than 20% CPU in the market.


By knutjb on 11/4/2009 6:02:24 PM , Rating: 2
I think what you're referring to was when AMD manufactured Intel's processors. AMD owns the 64 bit license that Intel needs. I don't think they're in too much long term trouble. One can't live without the other, unless you put one out of business...


By Calin on 11/5/2009 1:02:16 AM , Rating: 2
The license terms are not public... AMD considered a victory even the limited part of the licensing agreement they were able to make public so far.


By ajfink on 11/5/2009 3:06:17 AM , Rating: 2
Even if that is true, that section of the agreement would just be ruled anti-competitive and shens in light of the current marketplace.


"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation

Related Articles













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