Intel Loses Appeal of $1.4B USD European Union Fine for Illegal Behavior
June 12, 2014 2:34 PM
If anything, the appeals court concluded, the fine was appropriate in light of Intel's antitrust offenses
Intel Corp. (
) today was greeted by a major loss in one of Europe's top courts, and was ordered to pay a massive fine for abusive, illegal behavior that harmed consumers and drove up CPU prices over a decade ago. While the abuses in question have long since passed, the effects are still being felt in the form of less competition today in the PC CPU market, in which Intel owns a roughly 90 percent market share.
A little over a decade ago the CPU industry was locked in the closing stretch of clock speed wars. Intel Corp.'s (
) Pentium processors had long towered over its underdog competitor Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.'s (
) designs in performance. But something funny happened: AMD's Athlon project saw success and quite unexpectedly Intel's aging Pentium 4 found itself trailing the second-generation
core (which was inside
But the feisty, unheralded AMD chip saw little OEM pickup. And with the switch from a focus on clock speeds to a focus on multicore computing (the so-called "core war" era), Intel's Core-branded chips largely left AMD behind in terms of process, computing speeds, power efficiency, and process. AMD has remained a competitive minority player, but only in the mid-to-low end where it can occasionally beat Intel on account of competitive pricing.
AMD never recovered fully as Intel seized a sizeable performance lead in the core war era.
[Image Source: Intel]
History might have played out quite differently had AMD had a fair shot at selling its chips and cashing in on its rare, hard-fought win over Intel. But court records would later show that Intel wrote its own fate by showing little hesitation in using anticompetitive tactics to stifle its smaller competitor's sales prospects and ensure that its dominant market position was maintained.
A decade later, the court fallout of those tactics are finally coming to a close. This week the European Union's Luxembourg-based General Court ruled that Intel must pay
the €1.06B ($1.44B USD) fine
levied against it by the European Commission, which in 2009
found Intel guilty of corporate crimes
The 300-page ruling by the appeals court asserted:
The Commission demonstrated to the requisite legal standard that Intel attempted to conceal the anti-competitive nature of its practices and implemented a long term comprehensive strategy to foreclose AMD from the strategically most important sales channels.
The General Court considers that none of the arguments raised by Intel supports the conclusion that the fine imposed is disproportionate. On the contrary, it must be considered that that fine is appropriate in the light of the facts of the case.
In other words, the EU's highest appeals court -- after reviewing the evidence -- felt that Intel's violations of antitrust laws were so egregious that it was appropriate to fine the chipmaker 4.18 percent (1/25th) of its 2008 revenue.
Intel's well-documented violations in Europe mirror its tactics in other regions and were largely a two fold effort:
At the retail level
Pay retailers to only stock products contain Intel chips
The EC and EU General Court found that Intel paid off Media Saturn Holding not to carry AMD products
At the OEM level
Pay OEMs discounts if they bought the majority of their chips from Intel
The EC and EU General Court found Intel made these kinds of rebate payments to multiple PC OEMs, including:
Hewlett-Packard Comp. (
NEC Corp. (
The Lenovo Group, Ltd. (
The EU's fine came roughly five years after the alleged offenses occured,
the appeal took another five years
. In total the process consumed nearly a decade.
The BEUC ("
Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs
"/"European Consumers' Bureau") -- a European nonprofit consumer advocacy group funded by an EU grant -- lauded the decision. Its director-general Monique Goyens
When large companies abuse their dominance of the market, it causes direct harm to consumers. The court's ruling issued a strong reminder that such behaviour is illegal and unacceptable.
The European Commission also
praised the confirmation of its ruling
in the case, which it spent substantial effort investigating.
[Image Source: etechmag]
denies wrongdoing in the case, saying its discounts to OEMs
benefited European consumers and didn't harm competition. Intel spokeswoman Sophie Jacobs released a downbeat statement, commenting:
We are very disappointed about the decision. It's a complex case which is reflected in the decision. We will begin evaluating the decision.
Intel has no viable route to appeal. Its only possible appeal route is to challenge the antitrust rules and laws behind the ruling, in an appeal to the Court of Justice of the European Union. Such an appeal would be incredible complex, expensive, and unlikely to succeed.
Microsoft Corp. (
) largely lost a similar battle over its own massive antitrust fine and after facing the General Court's ruling agreed to settle up. After being
1.6B ($2.1B USD) in 2008 by the EC, Microsoft
appealed the fine
. The outcome for Microsoft was only marginally better than Intel.
Its fine was reduced, but only by €39M (~$48M USD in 2012 dollars)
-- an almost meaningless concession compared to the fine's overall magnitude.
McDermott Will & Emery partner Martina Maier
that the ruling could discourage other top U.S., Canadian, and Asian firms from appealing antitrust case rulings in the EU, particularly if their case is weak and focused on the "fairness" of the fine amount rather than the finding of guilt.
Comments Ms. Maier:
Companies under investigation by the Commission should not count on winning in court with the argument that the Commission would not have properly assessed the economic effects of an abuse of dominance.
This might well lead to a supplementary incentive for a company under investigation for an alleged abuse of dominance to settle with the Commission or to offer commitments in order to motivate the Commission to end its investigation.
Intel was also forced to pay major settlements in the U.S. under threat of fines. In 2009 it
paid AMD a settlement $1.25B USD
and pledged to avoid certain business tactics, in order to lay to rest civil litigation and
potential government fines
over its actions. It paid NVIDIA Corp. (
) -- a top PC graphics maker --
$1.5B USD in 2009
, as well, over similar tactics Intel used to gain dominance in the PC integrated graphics market.
Intel's dominant position delivered it twelve times as much profit as the fines and settlements cumulatively add to.
With the latest fine tacked on, in the last half decade Intel has paid over four billion dollars stemming from accusations of breaking antitrust laws and abusing its dominant position. However, it's unclear if the old aphorism "crime doesn't pay" holds true in these cases, as in the last half decade Intel has made $49B+ USD in profit (according to its
2013 10K filing
, thanks to its dominant position in the PC market. That profit is roughly twelve times the cost of settlements and fines for the illegal tactics it allegedly used to maintain its position.
"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
EU Court Orders Microsoft to Pay up Most of Record Fine
June 28, 2012, 2:57 AM
Microsoft Files Appeal Against $1.3 Billion EU Antitrust Fine
May 24, 2011, 12:27 PM
Intel Ponies up $1.5B USD to Settle With NVIDIA, Clean Legal Slate
January 10, 2011, 6:24 PM
Intel Responds to FTC Lawsuit, Allegations of Anticompetitive Tactics
December 16, 2009, 12:25 PM
Intel, AMD Settle Antitrust Disputes, Intel to Pay AMD $1.25 Billion
November 12, 2009, 9:34 AM
Comparison – Samsung Galaxy TabPro S Vs Microsoft Surface Pro 4
March 21, 2017, 7:40 AM
Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming G1 – Intel Thunderbolt 3 Certified Motherboard
March 9, 2017, 6:25 AM
Cisco partners with Reliance Jio for largest IP services platform
March 1, 2017, 6:15 AM
Gigabit Are you looking for an Ultra Compact board?
February 22, 2017, 6:30 AM
This Can / May Satisfy the Movie lovers
February 19, 2017, 9:52 AM
February 17, 2017, 6:01 AM
Most Popular Articles
Samsung Galaxy S8, Rumored Launch Date!
March 18, 2017, 6:45 AM
Gigabyte GA-Z170X-Gaming G1 – Intel Thunderbolt 3 Certified Motherboard
March 9, 2017, 6:25 AM
Lenovo ThinkPad T460 - Ultra-Thin and Feather-light
March 3, 2017, 6:00 AM
Huawei P8 Lite 2017 – Android 7 Nougat Smartphone with Octa-Core Processor
March 8, 2017, 7:03 AM
Intel Optane SSd DC P4800X – Super Fast 3D Storage
March 20, 2017, 7:35 AM
Latest Blog Posts
Are you thinking of performance and speed? Intel claims:
Mar 25, 2017, 7:45 AM
Apple buys an automation app called Workflow. The deal was completed today and brings the app along with its developers.
Mar 23, 2017, 7:35 AM
Apple Announces new color for iPhones and iPads
Mar 22, 2017, 7:45 AM
Instagram: You Can Now Save Live Videos For Later
Mar 21, 2017, 7:49 AM
Samsung Galaxy S8 to Get New Color Scheme
Mar 20, 2017, 7:45 AM
What else to worry about?
Mar 17, 2017, 6:45 AM
Icon of the Day: Intel/ NVIDIA or Mobileye
Mar 16, 2017, 6:15 AM
JUST IN - Twitter Hijacked : High-Profile Account Accesses
Mar 15, 2017, 7:07 AM
Mar 14, 2017, 7:30 AM
News and Tips
Mar 13, 2017, 6:30 AM
iPhone 8 – May Not Get Curved Screen
Mar 11, 2017, 8:00 AM
California paves way to self-driving car tests without humans
Mar 11, 2017, 7:18 AM
Smart Machines V hackers
Mar 10, 2017, 7:00 AM
Uber Can Resume Autonomous Car Testing in California
Mar 9, 2017, 6:50 AM
Mar 8, 2017, 7:09 AM
Mar 7, 2017, 8:45 AM
World news 3-6
Mar 6, 2017, 5:40 AM
Mar 4, 2017, 7:40 AM
Mixed News of the Day
Mar 4, 2017, 6:32 AM
Jaguar Land Rover invests in ride-sharing
Mar 3, 2017, 7:00 AM
Mixed News of The World:
Mar 2, 2017, 7:02 AM
World New 3-1
Mar 1, 2017, 6:30 AM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2017 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information