Intel is Denied a Hearing in Antitrust Case

Status
Not open for further replies.

bustapr

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
550
0
18,930
0
At this rate of problems going on at Intel I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD this as an advantage. I wonder if Intel's hardware production will be affected by these problems.
 

Fadamor

Distinguished
Jul 30, 2007
17
0
18,560
0
OK, anybody else see a trend here with the EU? If you excell in a particular market, the EU will castrate you. Why would anybody in the "Eh Union" bother to be the best at what they do? This is the main reason why the Soviet Union's economic model was unsustainable... if worker A puts out extra effort, but gets the same pay as worker B who does just enough to remain employed, then worker A stops trying. If I were Microsoft or Intel, I'd tell the EU to pound sand... or better yet, I'd tell them have fun with the operating systems and CPU they've designed because the EU is more trouble than the sales in their countries are worth. SEE ya! Wouldn't want to BE ya!
 

qwertymac93

Distinguished
Apr 27, 2008
9
0
18,510
0
you know what, i completely agree with the commission, intel is trying to destroy all competition, and while i cant blame them, i mean, that is the point of competition, to win. the thing that disturbs me is the fact that intel is not only trying to screw over amd, but they are SIMULTANEOUSLY attacking nvidia, they already took out via, who is next? IBM?
 

PrangeWay

Distinguished
Nov 21, 2008
18
0
18,560
0
Actually it's most likely only a matter of time b4 Intel runs into antitrust troubles in the US to. They're not even being subtle in flailing around thier monopoly stick lately (see all the Nvidia stuffs). They need to be kicked around a bit by the courts.
 

nelson_nel

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2009
98
0
18,580
0
These companies are not European. That is why the EU discriminates. They do not want the biggest American Companies to dominate globally and by banding together and creating a "significant market" and then creating a "Pick-and-choose" mantra on which companies are considered dominant, they hold the cards. These companies will bow down because there is a large demographic out there that they want to sell to and this will lead to even further erosion of America's place in the world economy, and if you think it isn't straegically being carried out by the EU, you need to study more. FYI, it IS wrong IMO but Intel also should not be able to pay partners to delay release of competitors products.
 

jerreece

Distinguished
Sep 7, 2006
400
0
18,930
0
Between this and the law suit between Intel and nVidia, Intel is going to be shelling out a lot of money & time through legal battles & fees.

Could be to the advantage of AMD.
 

dconnors

Distinguished
Jan 14, 2009
327
0
18,930
0
One thing is for sure...if there are any recently laid off lawyers out there who specialize in patents and tech ip, Intel and a bunch of other companies in Silicon Valley are probably looking for some extra legal brainpower.

-Devin
 

tenor77

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2009
396
0
18,930
0
I'm kinda on the fence about the legitimacy of this whole thing, but regardless, if Intel didn't respond in time they are SOL and I imagine someone's going to loose their job over this for letting the deadline slip. Like it or hate it, no matter where you live or do business if you don't respond on time you're leaving yourself wide open.
 

jstrode

Distinguished
Feb 25, 2009
1
0
18,510
0
Intel has plenty of lawyers - no doubt about it. However, EU is on attacking dominant companies. THey are not asking OSx to contain other browers, only Microsoft. Why? Because Microsoft dominates. They are only putting Intel in the antitrust spotlight. Why? Because Intel dominates. The Recent Intel Nvidia issue is also misunderstood. Intel and Nvidia reached a licensing agreement for a specific processor family. Nvidia is trying to use that specific processor family for other Intel processor family. Again, nothing a normal person would agree with, but because it is Intel, Nvidia is hoping that public rant will settle their way, for no legal valid reason.
 

grieve

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2004
694
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]Fadamor[/nom]OK, anybody else see a trend here with the EU? If you excell in a particular market, the EU will castrate you. Why would anybody in the "Eh Union" bother to be the best at what they do? This is the main reason why the Soviet Union's economic model was unsustainable... if worker A puts out extra effort, but gets the same pay as worker B who does just enough to remain employed, then worker A stops trying. If I were Microsoft or Intel, I'd tell the EU to pound sand... or better yet, I'd tell them have fun with the operating systems and CPU they've designed because the EU is more trouble than the sales in their countries are worth. SEE ya! Wouldn't want to BE ya![/citation]
No Doubt... the EU is all over MS for including IE in Windows also(and/or not including other browsers).

Intel and MS should just tell them BUB-BY and then we will see who wins.
 

grieve

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2004
694
0
18,930
0
We all know Intel, MS, and Google don’t play fair; this is why they are #1 at what they do, not #2.

Paying merchants to sell only your product and/or delay the opposition is pretty low, and VERY effective.
 

sandmanwn

Distinguished
Dec 1, 2006
124
0
18,630
0
EU vs MS = brought to court for bundling too much then brought back to court to force bundling of other browsers. lol @ irony.

EU vs Intel = well I guess we all know Intel has done some damned dirty deeds in its past, but the evidence sounds like its lacking a bit since the EU doesnt want to hand over more details.
 

ubergeetar

Distinguished
Aug 13, 2008
3
0
18,510
0
See the problem with this, is that, at least in the US, Intel has the patent/copyright to the x86 chips. In the beginning, Intel allowed AMD to reverse engineer what they had, so long as AMD didn't take anything from the design directly. Intel came up with the thing, so how is it possible for them NOT to be the monopoly/controlling force? Intel has the right to be this big. We know they did some messed up stuff, but at the end of the day, the x86 is theirs for the taking.
 

ravenware

Distinguished
May 17, 2005
156
0
18,630
0
The accusations include Intel paying OEM's to be Intel exclusive as well as paying companies to delay the launch of products based on AMD hardware.
Just a little funny to see dell finally using AMD chips right after the filing but not before it.
 

jaragon13

Distinguished
Jun 30, 2008
59
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]ubergeetar[/nom]See the problem with this, is that, at least in the US, Intel has the patent/copyright to the x86 chips. In the beginning, Intel allowed AMD to reverse engineer what they had, so long as AMD didn't take anything from the design directly. Intel came up with the thing, so how is it possible for them NOT to be the monopoly/controlling force? Intel has the right to be this big. We know they did some messed up stuff, but at the end of the day, the x86 is theirs for the taking.[/citation]
X86 code is too old,I say screw it.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Again, is there is a reason why the EU is not going after the European distributors WHO ACCEPTED THE ALLEGED MONEY FROM INTEL AND WERE THE ONES WHO EXCLUDED AMD? (other than they are European)

If the EU is claiming what Intel did is/was wrong, are not the companies who took the money and excluded AMD also wrong? If you hire someone to rob a bank, is the person that robbed the bank absolved of responsibility? It is only when the EU goes after the distributors for their actions and part in excluding AMD, will it be clear that this is not just another money grab from a profitable US company.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY