Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Intel to FTC: We Didn't Do Anything Wrong

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 44 comments

Intel calls the FTC case "misguided."

Earlier today, word came out that the U.S. Federal Trade Commission has launched a suit against Intel over the company's alleged anticompetitive practices. Despite its recent settlement with AMD, Intel maintains that it competes fairly and lawfully.

Intel Corporation issued the following statement regarding the suit filed by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC):

"Intel has competed fairly and lawfully. Its actions have benefitted consumers. The highly competitive microprocessor industry, of which Intel is a key part, has kept innovation robust and prices declining at a faster rate than any other industry. The FTC's case is misguided. It is based largely on claims that the FTC added at the last minute and has not investigated. In addition, it is explicitly not based on existing law but is instead intended to make new rules for regulating business conduct. These new rules would harm consumers by reducing innovation and raising prices."

Intel senior vice president and general counsel Doug Melamed added, "This case could have, and should have, been settled. Settlement talks had progressed very far but stalled when the FTC insisted on unprecedented remedies – including the restrictions on lawful price competition and enforcement of intellectual property rights set forth in the complaint -- that would make it impossible for Intel to conduct business."

"The FTC's rush to file this case will cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars to litigate issues that the FTC has not fully investigated. It is the normal practice of antitrust enforcement agencies to investigate the facts before filing suit. The Commission did not do that in this case," said Melamed.

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 49 Hide
    Glorian , December 16, 2009 7:39 PM
    Intel: Ok AMD we are sorry, you can have some pie.
    AMD: Thank you.
    FTC: CAN I HAS PIE TOO?!
  • 20 Hide
    roofus , December 16, 2009 7:26 PM
    Intel is innocent. They just said so. Everybody can move along now.
  • 18 Hide
    sstym , December 16, 2009 7:29 PM
    Also:
    "Boohoo. We didn't screw AMD over when their processors were better than ours (aaah, the pre Core 2 Duo years).
    It will cost the taxpayers millions of dollars WE could have extorted from them with a new netburst-like ripoff.
    Competition is bad, the FTC sucks, the consumers' interest (and my houses in the Caribbean) are clearly better served by an Intel Monopoly."
Other Comments
    Display all 44 comments.
  • 15 Hide
    logitic , December 16, 2009 6:55 PM
    Ok, I just fell out of my chair! I knew this was coming....


    Stay tuned for rebuttal from FTC
  • 20 Hide
    roofus , December 16, 2009 7:26 PM
    Intel is innocent. They just said so. Everybody can move along now.
  • 18 Hide
    sstym , December 16, 2009 7:29 PM
    Also:
    "Boohoo. We didn't screw AMD over when their processors were better than ours (aaah, the pre Core 2 Duo years).
    It will cost the taxpayers millions of dollars WE could have extorted from them with a new netburst-like ripoff.
    Competition is bad, the FTC sucks, the consumers' interest (and my houses in the Caribbean) are clearly better served by an Intel Monopoly."
  • 49 Hide
    Glorian , December 16, 2009 7:39 PM
    Intel: Ok AMD we are sorry, you can have some pie.
    AMD: Thank you.
    FTC: CAN I HAS PIE TOO?!
  • 0 Hide
    hakesterman , December 16, 2009 7:39 PM
    Shame on you Intel, I hope they stick it to you. You were very very very bad by giving companys like Dell, Gateway, Acer millions of dollars if they choose to only use your processers in all the high end PC's. Not only did you violate federal laws, you made it nearly impossible for consumers to get the Processor they wanted with the PC they wanted which i think a Class Action Lawsuit should also be filed. When it comes to fair competition you are as bad as bad can be, i hope they punish you very very badly.........

  • 10 Hide
    deadlockedworld , December 16, 2009 7:51 PM
    I think anything that helps other companies compete with intel is good for the marketplace.

    Competition breeds innovation--monopolies stagnate technological growth.
  • 5 Hide
    maximus20895 , December 16, 2009 7:53 PM
    ^someone wants to give them a spanking..
  • 1 Hide
    rhino13 , December 16, 2009 7:55 PM
    It's a good thing Obama can't be held accountable for his choice of FTC chairman, or his aggressive stance on anti-trust legislation, or anything else for that matter, otherwise this might reflect poorly on him.

    Intel is dead on. The FTC is trying to crate new laws with this lawsuit. But who can Intel turn to to defend them? This is what the Obama administration wants: More American companies becoming dependent upon the government.
  • 0 Hide
    False_Dmitry_II , December 16, 2009 7:55 PM
    Is spellcheck really that hard to use? I mean maybe it wouldn't be as important in the body of the article, but in the tagline? really?
  • -5 Hide
    sonic-boom , December 16, 2009 8:14 PM
    FTC is just being dumb here.
  • 1 Hide
    vaskodogama , December 16, 2009 8:14 PM
    but really, intel is the leading company in cpu's, it is a little hard on them to file a case after a case for them. I did not like the actions they did to AMD forcing oems to buy only their cpu's.
    in my opinion, until they are not forcing others to do shit, they can innovate then sell their products at any price they want, it's not their fault, it's the others that cannot compete.
    I hope ftc's case drops.
  • 4 Hide
    sliem , December 16, 2009 8:17 PM
    False_Dmitry_IIIs spellcheck really that hard to use? I mean maybe it wouldn't be as important in the body of the article, but in the tagline? really?


    There's no such thing as spellcheck in TH news.
  • 0 Hide
    that_aznpride101 , December 16, 2009 8:26 PM
    I hope Intel pays dearly for their monopolistic practices and the ground for competition becomes more even after this.

    This is a sad day for Intel fanboys everywhere. Too bad. =)

    NYTimes has a more informative article regarding this lawsuit than TH bloggers (big surprise)
  • 1 Hide
    gorehound , December 16, 2009 8:30 PM
    great news i say.and what about their krap prices for CPU's maybe they are price-fixing us all.
  • -2 Hide
    gekko668 , December 16, 2009 8:31 PM
    Intel is going to jack up the price on their processor lineup to make back the money lost in the law suites.
  • 7 Hide
    stm1185 , December 16, 2009 8:45 PM
    Whats next, "We Only Paid AMD $1.25 Billion cause we felt sorry for them"

  • -2 Hide
    AMW1011 , December 16, 2009 9:29 PM
    sliemThere's no such thing as spellcheck in TH news.


    Then I recommend all Tom's writers to use Fire Fox which has a built in spell checker.

    Also, though I think there is something to the claims, Intel is right in that the prices of processors are at an amazing low for amazing performance. In both the CPU and GPU world we have price to performance ratios totally unheard of in the PC industry.
  • 1 Hide
    elel , December 16, 2009 9:29 PM
    Well - so much for seeing Intel prices come down.
  • 5 Hide
    Anonymous , December 16, 2009 9:51 PM
    Yeah, elel, Intel's prices aren't high because they're money-grubbing bastards, no sir, it's because they get fined when they break the law....

    A price range of $250 to $1000 for what is an identical CPU with just a higher multiplier? Clearly the $250 part has a decent margin, what's the margin on the $1000 part, since we know it didn't cost any more to make?
  • -1 Hide
    Gin Fushicho , December 16, 2009 9:52 PM
    GlorianIntel: Ok AMD we are sorry, you can have some pie.AMD: Thank you.FTC: CAN I HAS PIE TOO?!


    Sounds about right. FTC didn't earn nor deserve pie.
Display more comments