Monday, October 26th 2009
Now US Inclines to Fine Intel for Antitrust Malpractice
Trailing the European Union's record 1.45 Billion Dollar penalty against silicon giant Intel for antitrust malpractice in Europe, American antitrust regulators are on the verge of filing their own set of charges against the company, emanating out of similar findings of investigations carried out by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Sources tell BusinessDay that three out of four commissioners on the FTC were in favor of filing a complaint against Intel. FTC's own inquiry opened in June, last year. It could be a matter of weeks, or even months before a vote formalizing FTC's stand on the issue happens.
"Our business practices are lawful and [work] to the benefit of consumers," said Intel spokesperson Chuck Mulloy, in response to the BusinessDay report. "We certainly have been working closely with the FTC as they conduct their investigation. We would hope that the speculation is incorrect ," he added. The US antitrust investigation follows similar investigations that have concluded against the favor of Intel, by the European Union, South Korea, and Japan. Japan's trade commission concluded in 2005 that Intel violated the country's anti-monopoly act. In June last year, South Korea fined Intel about $26m, finding it offered rebates to PC makers in return for not buying AMD microprocessors. EU's investigations yielded similar findings, where the company was fined 1.06 Billion EUR for paying computer makers to postpone or cancel products that use microprocessors made by smaller competitor AMD.
Source:
BusinessDay
"Our business practices are lawful and [work] to the benefit of consumers," said Intel spokesperson Chuck Mulloy, in response to the BusinessDay report. "We certainly have been working closely with the FTC as they conduct their investigation. We would hope that the speculation is incorrect ," he added. The US antitrust investigation follows similar investigations that have concluded against the favor of Intel, by the European Union, South Korea, and Japan. Japan's trade commission concluded in 2005 that Intel violated the country's anti-monopoly act. In June last year, South Korea fined Intel about $26m, finding it offered rebates to PC makers in return for not buying AMD microprocessors. EU's investigations yielded similar findings, where the company was fined 1.06 Billion EUR for paying computer makers to postpone or cancel products that use microprocessors made by smaller competitor AMD.
129 Comments on Now US Inclines to Fine Intel for Antitrust Malpractice
Damn, it could have saved me a lot of time catching that from the beginning.
@Solaris
Dots and commas please! :cry:
I agree on many parts though.
* Your old country ideas I mean, because it's no longer that way. It's not been in a long time anyway, your ideas are more like from the 70's 80's.
I know I went a little bit over the top, but it's just that I can't understand such pretentious actitudes.
How is it any pretentious to agree to and support what almost all law system models in the world have dictated? Pretending that your ideas are over the laws of your country is pretentious, pretending you are over the world ones is just... well I dont know a word for that.
Consider this fair warning to you all.
Again, no offense, I just don't see how we are OT.
I agree with you in some parts but not in others. Whilst i am not up to 100% knowledge on the market laws in the US i shall try to explain what i mean:
You are a company, a very large company... internationally big. You want to make some more money but see a competitor is doing very well. You sit back and ponder on what to do. You come up with rebates, so then you go of to the market and tell everyone that if you buy x amount of product you will get x amount back in the form of a rebate. Job done, market buys lots of your product and sales increase slightly.
Now as i understand it, this is NOT illegal and as it should be of course. Nothing here was wrong, you merely offered a rebate, it was up to the market to decide whether to take it and the competitor was still allowed to compete.
Now the same company in the same market, decides no no no, this is not enough. And goes back to the market and tells them that if they do not buy the product at x and NOT buy the competitors then the price of the product will increase vastly. The market still wants the product and decides to purchase it on the cheap, under the condition that it does not buy from any other competitor for a while.
This as it stands IS illegal. It is blocking the competitor and restricting a "free" market. Why now, has there been NO blame placed on the market and all of i only placed on the big company is beyond me, but is stupid in itself. Whether the law is proper or not can't be helped but the companies actions go against that law and therefore are open to punishment.
Other things i would look at is WHEN the company did this, and WHEN the law came into effect. They may get lucky and find the law was put into place after this happened and therefore they did not do anything wrong as it was not illegal at the time. Also again i would look into the market and ask why no-one in it spoke up and questioned the companies actions.
EDIT: With TMM post below, this is only a statement that an investigation has/will be started. Intel has not been found guilty of anything yet, and as the US law system works differently a different result may be found.
One thing you people have to realize is in the U.S. we are innocent unless proven guilty. An investigation is just that. An investigation. It means nothing by our laws.
One thing I will say is I feel there should be infractions handed out. If I were to go around and talk about hurting other countries on this forum just because "I don't like them" infractions would be abundant. I would expect them with such bold statements.
People should have respect for people no matter what country they are from. You should never judge a person based off of their government. If you do then YOU are a dinosaur of the past.
Sucks when one's own medicine is used against them, eh?I... seriously can't believe you, of all people, just said that. :confused:
Thanks for not attacking me on my views, btw. It really is appreciated after the way this thread has gone for a couple of pages. :toast: