Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel sues AMD

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2009 2:05:28 PM

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1558723/intel-...

...for losing a couple of pages out of 200 million. Think of the lawyers fees next time you buy an i5.

More about : intel sues amd

a b à CPUs
October 15, 2009 3:13:29 PM

Lol.

Check out our new governments laws.

Banks get access to every single receipt you ever got for 2 years otherwise, you can get legal action against you. Every part of the purchasing info is given to every bank to make a more complete credit history thingy.
a c 114 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 15, 2009 3:31:43 PM

I think this is simply another turn of the same coin.

IIRC the courts got steamed at Intel for 'missing' emails and their retention policy. Now, apparently, Intel is blaming AMD for Intel emails that Intel doesn't retain anymore and claiming AMD lost the Intel emails that may or may not have existed or were originally destroyed by Intel?

Did I come close?

And LOL at 200 million emails ....



Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2009 3:34:26 PM

Spam them until their inbox is full, then sue them.

Nice tatic might I say?
October 15, 2009 4:47:10 PM

Wisecracker said:
I think this is simply another turn of the same coin.

IIRC the courts got steamed at Intel for 'missing' emails and their retention policy. Now, apparently, Intel is blaming AMD for Intel emails that Intel doesn't retain anymore and claiming AMD lost the Intel emails that may or may not have existed or were originally destroyed by Intel?

Did I come close?

You're not even in the ballpark: Retention_Sanctions_redacted_Motion

* Not speaking for Intel Corp *
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2009 5:05:36 PM

The argument seems to be more about documents AMD should have kept long before the action started. Intel's argument appears to be that AMD exaggerated about its retention program being really good, intel claims they did some research based on their own issues in dealing with so much paper work and concluded that AMD's wasnt that great after all.

It seems that AMD were talking up their retention program somewhat as they did have some issues. It's hard to say whether or not intel have a leg to stand on here, they probably need to prove that AMD knew for definite that they were going to go ahead with the anti-trust action, and therefore whether retaining that paperwork was required by law or not.

I have no idea what intel hope to gain out of this except some reduction on AMD's reputation. The courts will probably conclude that it is a waste of time.
October 15, 2009 5:23:19 PM

We should treat this like AMD fanboys treat litigation against Intel; as Gospel truth!

AMD ARE EVIL! LOOK! SOMEONE FILED A LAWSUIT AGAINST THEM!
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2009 5:26:56 PM

No that happens if, or when AMD are found guilty. :p 
October 15, 2009 5:29:18 PM

jennyh said:
No that happens if, or when AMD are found guilty. :p 


Is.

When AMD IS found guilty.



But then shouldn't you apply the same treatment to Intel and not use pending litigation as proof of ultimate evil-ness. Didn't BaronMatrix once us pending litigation against Intel as proof they were the reason for the Panama Conflict of 1989?


(Edit: Not saying that all examples you have provided in the past have been pending, you have used some actual judgements)
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2009 5:40:56 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_Engli...

in particular

"BrE: The Clash are a well-known band; AmE: The Clash is a well-known band.
BrE: Pittsburgh are the champions; AmE: Pittsburgh is the champion."

Or my version - intel are well-known cheats, AMD are the champions of everything good and true. etc. Feel free to run that one past your wife btw. :D 
October 16, 2009 2:18:22 AM

jennyh said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_Engli...

in particular

"BrE: The Clash are a well-known band; AmE: The Clash is a well-known band.
BrE: Pittsburgh are the champions; AmE: Pittsburgh is the champion."

Or my version - intel are well-known cheats, AMD are the champions of everything good and true. etc. Feel free to run that one past your wife btw. :D 


Very interesting!

I guess that means I can't pick on you anymore :-(
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 4:40:36 AM

It's wikipedia...

TC, you scare me...

Checking for grammar and educational content in my posts.

Would be good for a Halloween surprise, 'grammar check or treat!'
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
October 16, 2009 5:02:55 AM

sonoran said:
You're not even in the ballpark: Retention_Sanctions_redacted_Motion

* Not speaking for Intel Corp *


So if I am reading this correctly, its is showing that AMD did not have or retain the proper paperwork for the Antitrust case when they should have started, thus it would throw this case out but possibly open a new one.

Well one that starts from 2005 anyways. Problem is that thats about when most OEMs started to really push AMD CPUs since Prescott turned into a meh CPU. That could mean AMD wouldn't have anything.

unfortunately the law is the law. Japan is much like the uS in that way too. If you do not have all the proper evidence or paperwork required then you pretty much get screwed. If there is even the slightest doubt that Manson did not kill anyone then he is not guilty.

jennyh said:
Or my version - intel are well-known cheats, AMD are the champions of everything good and true. etc. Feel free to run that one past your wife btw. :D 


Meh Wiki is meh. Its great for fast facts but is not always 100%.

Also, I hope this quote is not true because to AMD people who think like that have wallets ripe for the pickin to fill their own.

Corporations big or small still means money making.

Now I find it kinda funny how the posters to that article bash Intel for this yet instead of reading it or understanding the meaning they consider it sneaky or underhanded. I personally think AMD blaming all their financial problems on Intel is pretty underhanded since they also took the proper steps to insure they would be losing money too.....
October 16, 2009 5:09:28 AM

It would be really funny to watch Intel get too aggressive and watch AMD go out of buisness...

To the original topic post, LOL!
October 16, 2009 6:58:59 AM

I still think this action will get shot down by the courts (unless Intel pays them too). And it's been some time since I saw a post by BM (or DS for that matter). Personally I still prefer AMD, even if I do have a mini ITX based on an intel core 2 (my Ultra portable, soon to be in a PS2 casing).
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 8:14:06 AM

He is back on his meds now so we have lost three users as a consequence ...
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 12:11:18 PM

TechnologyCoordinator said:
Very interesting!

I guess that means I can't pick on you anymore :-(

I speak with "are" but usually type with "is," but only because I was forced to type Americanish for a while
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 12:25:37 PM

teh modz afflicted fur sure.

Melbourne Bitter STAT !!


a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 12:30:59 PM

Do they have an Aussie dictionary for Firefox... sure would be nice.
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 1:10:23 PM

They sure do.
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 1:14:26 PM

Aw, thanks kitty.
!