Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

Intel could face largest ever European Union fine

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Intel
  • European
Last response: in CPUs
May 2, 2009 5:08:40 AM

Intel could face largest ever European Union fine

Legal experts estimate figure could top €1bn
Iain Thomson in San Francisco, vnunet.com

01 May 2009

Analysts are forecasting that Intel could face the largest fine in European history, if found guilty of anti-competitive practices by the European Union.

The EU is currently investigating the chip giant over anti-competitive practices, including offering discounts to manufacturers for using Intel chips, as well as encouraging them to not use hardware from rival AMD.

"I would be surprised if the fine isn't as high or higher than in the Microsoft case," Howard Cartlidge, head of the EU competition group at law firm Olswang in London, told The New York Times.

"Technology markets are where the European Commission has perceived particular problems due to dominant companies."

Legal analysts estimate that the fine could exceed €1bn, well above the €497m fine levied against Microsoft.

Intel has already been found guilty of anti-competitive practices in Japan and Korea, and now faces investigations by the EU and the US Federal Trade Commission.

In the EU case, the company insists that it has done nothing wrong and is confident of being proved innocent. "Overall, Intel's conduct is lawful, pro-competitive and beneficial to consumers," said Intel spokesman Robert Manetta.

However, AMD begs to differ. Senior sources within the company say that Intel has been conducting anti-competitive practices to maintain a dominant 80/20 split in market share that has not changed in years, despite modifications in technology.

AMD pointed out that, even when Intel misjudged the market with the introduction of the poorly received Itanium, and AMD's Xeon had a clear run at the server space, the relative market shares barely changed.

AMD contends that Intel uses subsidies to make sure manufacturers use its chips and ignore the competition.

The sources cited a comment by HP director Tom Perkins that came out during the HP spying scandal. Perkins said that "Intel might be kicking the cr** out of us," which AMD takes to relate to HP's decision to use more AMD processors.
Permalink: http://www.vnunet.com/2241524

http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2241524/intel-face-la...

More about : intel face largest european union fine

May 2, 2009 5:36:08 AM

OH NOES!

Not my baby Intel.
I thought I loved you two AMD. :'( 

Through all I'm concerned, their processors are a lot more powerful than the ones from my childhood, and a completely basic computer doesn't cost $2000+ anymore.
They are providing great products at great prices, both companies.

Billions have to go into R&D, explaining a=much of the price.

Bugger off yeah damned Union!
I thought my old work union was horrible and expensive...
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 5:40:28 AM

I like the statement about "AMD's Xeon"

:lol: 
Related resources
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 5:54:25 AM

The title of this topic has been edited by Randomizer
May 2, 2009 6:03:30 AM

Lol the E.U. zeesh such petty people there, everything is fine and then economic crisis so lets fine and sue every non European based company, it doesn't make us look bad if we do it to the tech community because Europe doesn't really produce things like OS or computer parts really so it doesn't look like European protection-ism.
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 6:24:24 AM

randomizer said:
The title of this topic has been edited by Randomizer

Nice

:bounce: 
a c 211 à CPUs
a b å Intel
May 2, 2009 7:55:41 AM

Damn random when did you get MOD powers?

And yea I read this. Of course they will fine Intel. Then they will go after Google because Google is too big for their own good. Google pushed out other search providers such as Yahoo by using a "backdoor" search.

And by backdoor the EU will say "giving websites money to not be found on other search providers such as Yahoo or MSN, or giving rebates for using Google".

I mean they have to have some reason to fine them, right?
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 8:07:58 AM

cjl said:
Nice

:bounce: 

Couldn't resist, the EU annoys me :lol: 

jimmysmitty said:
Damn random when did you get MOD powers?

About a week ago.

jimmysmitty said:
I mean they have to have some reason to fine them, right?


No, only an excuse.
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 11:21:39 AM

Do you even know anything about this case randomizer?

I'm guessing no.
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 12:07:40 PM

Well done, have a cookie,
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 12:15:05 PM

So why are you changing the title of another posters thread to reflect your personal views when you clearly don't even have any knowledge about it?

Don't bother explaining it to me, explain it to whichever one of the real mods asks after I ask them the same question.
May 2, 2009 12:22:03 PM

Jenny just knock it off with the constant Intel bashing and AMD ass kissing. Really, just stop. Its pretty embarasing. You dont give a crap about the thread title being changed, all youre worried about is making sure Intel is painted with a bulls-eye at every opportunity.
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 12:30:38 PM

I'm sorry jenny, I didn't know AMD/Intel fanaticism was something I had to support. I better check the ToS again. :pt1cable: 
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 12:37:31 PM

jennyh said:
So why are you changing the title of another posters thread to reflect your personal views when you clearly don't even have any knowledge about it?

Don't bother explaining it to me, explain it to whichever one of the real mods asks after I ask them the same question.


Random, don't abuse your mod powers, please.

With that said, what was the orignal title? Was it in caps? :lol:  :lol: 
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 12:40:16 PM

The original title was the same title as the article. And no, it didn't even say (shocking!). I miss thunderman's fanboy news posts.
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 12:43:41 PM

Excuse me, I need more coffee.
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 1:36:51 PM

spathotan said:
Jenny just knock it off with the constant Intel bashing and AMD ass kissing. Really, just stop. Its pretty embarasing. You dont give a crap about the thread title being changed, all youre worried about is making sure Intel is painted with a bulls-eye at every opportunity.


No actually I *do* give a crap about the title being changed, that is why I asked another, much longer standing mod for an explanation of it. And if I don't get a satisfactory answer, I'll keep asking until I do.
May 2, 2009 2:21:19 PM

jennyh said:
No actually I *do* give a crap about the title being changed


If the title were changed to "Evil Intel found guilty of heinous crimes (Shocking!!)" I bet you wouldn't have put up as much of a fight.

jennyh said:
And if I don't get a satisfactory answer, I'll keep asking until I do.


You mean you'll keep asking until they block your pms.
May 2, 2009 3:39:22 PM

It seems rather sillychildish to me to change the thread title from something simple and to the point into flamebait...

Learn2Mod

EDIT:Fixd
May 2, 2009 4:08:36 PM

Give randomizer a break, he's new to this.
Maybe the EU will end up owning Chysler heheh, then all the rest of the countries can fine them for making a car that no one buys, and for trying to push it on people heheh

With this, you could see the writing on the wall. If Intel is fined, I just hope we get the finalized version as to why, so then maybe itd be easier to draw conclusions about it
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 4:32:19 PM

turboflame said:
If the title were changed to "Evil Intel found guilty of heinous crimes (Shocking!!)" I bet you wouldn't have put up as much of a fight


Yes you know why that is? It's because it wouldn't actually be that far from the truth.

Jeez do you conspiracy theorists actually believe that intel is being picked on by practically all of the worlds governments for no reason?

Randomizer are you even aware that the lawsuits against intel in the US are about to start? Who are you going to blame then? Maybe the US needs some recession bailout cash?
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 4:35:02 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Give randomizer a break, he's new to this.
Maybe the EU will end up owning Chysler heheh, then all the rest of the countries can fine them for making a car that no one buys, and for trying to push it on people heheh

With this, you could see the writing on the wall. If Intel is fined, I just hope we get the finalized version as to why, so then maybe itd be easier to draw conclusions about it


New or not Jaydee there is no excuse for changing the title of another posters thread just because you don't like what it says. People don't mind it when the other posters have their opinions but when mods start abusing their powers that's when it all goes to hell.
May 2, 2009 5:00:39 PM

While I mainly agree with you, randomizer is new to this. Im sure it wont happen as easily again, without more thought. I didnt see the original Post , and it doesnt seem to be flame bait, or incorrect, and I see your point.
I agree the EU is somewhat arrogant, and typically politically led, and knows nothing about business as well, but as i said, let us see their findings , if a fines levied, and go from there.
If Intel has done some grievous things, then those married to Intel will just have to suck it up, on the other hand, if its just frivolous political maneuvering, then shame on the EU. I dont trust either one, actually, tho itd be nicer to see Intel taking the higher ground, and us knowing the EU for the politicians they are.
I think the problem is, either Intel is as good as some people hope, or they cheated their way to take back the crown ad nauseum, whichever it is, this should at least define it somewhat more
a b à CPUs
May 2, 2009 6:58:20 PM

Oh shut the @#%$ up.
May 2, 2009 7:07:15 PM

randomizer said:
The title of this topic has been edited by Randomizer


Thank you for the Great Justice.
May 2, 2009 7:32:54 PM

Some see Intel as a great company that does its business as every business should, or would if they could business that way.
Others see Intel as stealing their market share by holding AMD back illegally, by doing what these findings are here to prove, one way or another.
I dont hold much weight for the Korean findings, or the Japanese findings either, as the penalties were small. But if the EU clobbers Intel with something huge, it has to be seen as carrying more weight for several reasons, like adding up all three Intel failures to stop these findings, and the size of the fine to name a few.
At this point, who knows how its going to turn out. I believe if Intel is indeed exonerated in the EU, the other 2 findings carry no weight whatsoever
May 2, 2009 8:56:59 PM

Thing is, the EU finding is likely going to be contested in court. So even if a fine is levied, we'll have to wait years to find out what real, actual judges think about it rather than an administrative commission.
May 2, 2009 10:52:12 PM

I have a hard time imagining a company that provides (arguably) both equal to inferior performance and price/performance consistantly holding >75% market share doing it honestly. But we shall see what we shall see. And it's difficult to feel sympathetic towards them, being Chipzilla and all. But I'm not sure I'd like to see them get raped, either.

PS

WTF, Randomizer? I'm surprised you haven't had your moderator privileges revoked. You're there to prevent flame wars and such!
May 2, 2009 11:31:44 PM

I wonder how many more people are going to need a diaper change after pretending they care about Randomizer changing the thread title.
May 3, 2009 1:36:00 AM

smithereen said:
I have a hard time imagining a company that provides (arguably) both equal to inferior performance and price/performance consistantly holding >75% market share doing it honestly. But we shall see what we shall see. And it's difficult to feel sympathetic towards them, being Chipzilla and all. But I'm not sure I'd like to see them get raped, either.


Its called manufacturing capacity restrains (on AMD's part) and vastly superior marketing effort (on Intel's part). Aside from that, IMO the main reason why AMD only controls a fraction of what Intel has is because its management consistently lacks vision for the future.
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2009 1:39:09 AM

smithereen said:
I have a hard time imagining a company that provides (arguably) both equal to inferior performance and price/performance consistantly holding >75% market share doing it honestly. But we shall see what we shall see. And it's difficult to feel sympathetic towards them, being Chipzilla and all. But I'm not sure I'd like to see them get raped, either.

PS

WTF, Randomizer? I'm surprised you haven't had your moderator privileges revoked. You're there to prevent flame wars and such!


Currently, Intel has unarguably superior performance, and comparable price/performance everywhere except the extreme high end. In fact, the only period recently where this wasn't the case was a period when Intel was pushing the P4 architecture.
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2009 1:42:46 AM

There, I changed it back for the falsely pedantic. Interestingly, I "started" a flame war by taking the focus off Intel, rather than putting focus on it :lol:  It's amazing that fanboys can degrade a topic no matter what it's about.
May 3, 2009 2:05:27 AM

Well yes, cjl, I know that. I'm talking about AMD's glory days, in the Athlon 64 era - which I believe is what this lawsuit is about.

To Randomizer, you can't possibly have imagined that you were contributing by changing the title. The origional title was a perfectly neutral statement of fact, not some rabid fanboyism or antagonism.
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2009 2:10:03 AM

Nope, it was just a bad joke on my part about the number of lawsuits the EU has been involved in.
May 3, 2009 2:25:36 AM

Alright, fair enough. They *are* notoriously fine-happy.
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2009 2:33:39 AM

The sad part is they aren't doing it for the consumer, just themselves. Remember the "N" editions of Windows (heh... I'm using one)? I'm sure the consumer benefits greatly by not having Windows Media Player installed. :sarcastic:  Too bad the sales of those editions didn't go too well, but at least the EU won another lawsuit.

I'm sure Intel, being the large corporation that they are, are not completely "moral" in their business dealings. However, it should be up to the US to fine US companies, not the EU. The EU are like the RIAA, always on everybody's back and nobody likes them. The difference is that the EU win, whereas the RIAA get counter-sued. :lol: 
May 3, 2009 2:51:46 AM

You, my friend, have no idea. Have you ever heard of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal? If you can get them to hear your case, the accused must pay for an elaborite investigation, as well as all legal fees, even if he wins. And in all of history, only one person has ever one, and only because he smuggled a tape recorder into an 'interview' and released it to the Internet. They most recently made McDonalds pay a year's salary + $80,000 damages to a woman who was let go, after being paid a year of disability leave, when she developed a skin condition preventing her from *washing her hands*. Apparently, that violated her human right to be dirty while preparing food.

Oh, and they also demanded McDonalds "Change their discriminatory hiring and buisness practices to accomodate employees with such medical conditions." Apparently, that outweights our rights to CLEAN FOOD.

</off-topic rant>
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2009 2:57:30 AM

I haven't heard that case but it does sound typical of the crap that goes on. I only hear what's reported on the Internet (assuming I read it). After all, I'm on the other side of the world where news is always 3 days late and if it's not about Australia then it's about the US and rarely anywhere else. :p 
May 3, 2009 8:16:05 AM

smithereen said:
You, my friend, have no idea. Have you ever heard of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal? If you can get them to hear your case, the accused must pay for an elaborite investigation, as well as all legal fees, even if he wins. And in all of history, only one person has ever one, and only because he smuggled a tape recorder into an 'interview' and released it to the Internet. They most recently made McDonalds pay a year's salary + $80,000 damages to a woman who was let go, after being paid a year of disability leave, when she developed a skin condition preventing her from *washing her hands*. Apparently, that violated her human right to be dirty while preparing food.

Oh, and they also demanded McDonalds "Change their discriminatory hiring and buisness practices to accomodate employees with such medical conditions." Apparently, that outweights our rights to CLEAN FOOD.

</off-topic rant>

Just like governments have a lotto for gamblers, it seems O' Canada also has one for workers too!!! If they select you for "their" case, then youre sure to win big mooooney
As for the case, true, itll be years, but maybe at least we will get more info on what Intel did, and be able to decide for ourselves just how "guilty" Intel is
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2009 10:18:20 AM

smithereen said:
You, my friend, have no idea. Have you ever heard of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal?


Ever heard of the Australian Kangaroo Society Council?
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2009 10:58:22 AM

No, no. Google lies.
a c 211 à CPUs
a b å Intel
May 3, 2009 11:07:03 AM

jennyh said:
Yes you know why that is? It's because it wouldn't actually be that far from the truth.

Jeez do you conspiracy theorists actually believe that intel is being picked on by practically all of the worlds governments for no reason?

Randomizer are you even aware that the lawsuits against intel in the US are about to start? Who are you going to blame then? Maybe the US needs some recession bailout cash?


Actually it could be far from the truth. Problem is that we as the little people do not have anything else but AMDs lawyers saying its true. And the sad thing is that lawyers don't make the big bucks in stating the whole truth. They make it in bending the truth to their side. No matter who they are representing, Intel or AMD. And unless you can actually cough up the actual evidence that proves everything to be 100% true then you best not talk as if you do know.

And yes I do think the other world governments would pick on a American company. Hell MS is being tagged by just as many countries and was recently banned from Cuba for being an American company, although funniest thing is they still use AMD/Intel CPUs which are a American company and are using their own customized Linux which was also done by an American. The world doesn't like the US and mostly because they hate that they cannot be as successful. Thats why they find anything they can throw at us and trash talk. Well except Australia so far. They seem to not give a crap about anything outside their own country, much like it should be anyways.

The lawsuits all around the world have been started by AMD. the EU is just jumping on the wagon to get themselves some extra cash they can throw in their pockets. The sad thing is that most of that money will never make it into AMDs hands. And the fine will be fore something stupid instead of the actual charges.

You know there is a big difference between a fine and actual charges being set by a court, right? Unlike the US a lot of other countries go based off of guilty until proven innocent. Which sucks but meh.

smithereen said:
Well yes, cjl, I know that. I'm talking about AMD's glory days, in the Athlon 64 era - which I believe is what this lawsuit is about.

To Randomizer, you can't possibly have imagined that you were contributing by changing the title. The origional title was a perfectly neutral statement of fact, not some rabid fanboyism or antagonism.


I always have and always will admit that A64 was awesome. It was the better CPU. But as said many times before, since AMD was always the underdog and such a small company with limited FABs they couldn't produce enough CPUs to keep up with the demand. nd not the demand for those CPUs but also the demand for new PCs. That era was a boom in the PC market. It went from a PC in every 1 out of say 3 homes to 2 PCs per home. Hell I have 4 right now, 2 as backups.

AMDs lacking of FABs and inability of being able to produce enoughchips to fit that demand was probably the biggets contributor to them not grabbing a massive amount of market share. If that wasn't there and then they didn't grab anymore market share than they did (went up to over 30% which was quite a jump for a 3-4 year period) then I would probably believe that it was all Intel holding them back.

But until there is deffinative proof about it that is 100% accurate and not changed, forged or any of the such I still will not belive it.

The rebates I couldn't care about personally. I mean a lot of companies sign into contracts with other companies for exclusivity all the time and give discounts for that product. Thats why McDonalds only serves Coke products as drinks.

AMD claiming Intel was selling their CPUs undercost without knowing the manufacturing cost is very questionable. That information is normally never released to public. As well as them claiming that they were paying companies to delay them is as well. Although in 2004 Dell decided on their own to not use AMD. I read a article on it. Was weird TBH but thats what it was.

But we shall see in the long run. The most important thing is this:

The cake is and always will be a lie.
a b à CPUs
May 3, 2009 12:01:56 PM

Quote:
Nope, and neither has google it would seem.

Damn convicts and their lying ways.


Time for a trip to the Gaol!