Thursday, July 23rd 2009

Intel Appeals Against EU Antitrust Verdict

Earlier this year in May, the European Commission for anti-competitive practices found Intel guilty of various antitrust practices. The company was then slapped with a massive 1.06 billion Euro (US $1.45 billion) fine, the single largest antitrust fine it has ever meted out to a company. On Wednesday, Intel explored its legal option of appealing against the fine with Court of First Instance in Luxembourg, Europe's second highest judicial body. The company argues that the EC regulator failed to consider the evidence that supported Intel's contention during the trial.

In a telephone interview with ComputerWorld, Robert Manetta, an Intel spokesperson said "We believe the Commission misinterpreted some evidence and ignored other pieces of evidence." Meanwhile, apart from the fine Intel is expected to pay within three months of the verdict, the ruling also puts a stop to Intel's rebates to PC manufacturers and retailers on condition of near or total exclusivity, among several other deemed malpractices. Authorities in South Korea and Japan found similar irregularities in Intel's marketing methods, while the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and New York Attorney General's office are investigating the company for abuse of its monopoly position.Source: ComputerWorld
Add your own comment

307 Comments on Intel Appeals Against EU Antitrust Verdict

#1
Meecrob
TheMailMan78 said:
In the U.S. you are Innocent until proven guilty.
I will respond to this with so of your own words

TheMailMan78 said:
your logic is 100% correct. In a perfectly functioning American society. Honestly I really wish you were right too. However it simply doesn't work this way.
sad part, this system isnt perfectly functional, its corrupt, If you have enough money, you can get away with anything if you really want to try, just get some good lawers and keep fighting it in court till they give up.

[I.R.A]_FBi said:
There are some ppl who think AMD is an inferior rip of :laugh:
I have had people tell me that AMD is a cheap Chinese knockoff of the all American Intel cpu and that its not to be trusted.........after I explain the facts and that what they said was a load of BS about 1/2 of them are fine with it and actually consider AMD systems of the other 50% about half get extremely mad and storm off and the other half still aren't sure but enlarge decide if the AMD system has the same reliability and performance of the intel system, but costs less then they are willing to give it a shot.

Its shocking how un-informed people are.

I once had a person bring in a system they got at frys(frys special) it had a c7 cpu and some HORRIBLE ddr ram, it was pretty pathetic, when I explained that the cpu wasnt capable of what they wanted to do(record video from a tv card that had NO encoding onboard at all) took me alot of explaining to make them understand the SLOW ASS via c7 in the system was NOT DESIGNED FOR THAT and that frys shouldn't have sold them the system for that use, It was a great little netbox tho, just couldnt really deal with what they wanted it for(htpc/mpc)

also getting the person to understand the diffrance between via, amd and intel was....HELL, the guy also argued with me that intel made them all it was just diffrent models ROFL.......

blah, I still stan by the fact that I dont think intel should get out of any of the fines the worlds levied against them, and they did do things that where unethical, You break the law/rules you take your chances, If you get caught, you should just say "aww shit" and pay your bills.
Posted on Reply
#2
TheMailMan78
Big Member
Meecrob said:
I will respond to this with so of your own words


sad part, this system isn't perfectly functional, its corrupt, If you have enough money, you can get away with anything if you really want to try, just get some good lawers and keep fighting it in court till they give up.



I have had people tell me that AMD is a cheap Chinese knockoff of the all American Intel cpu and that its not to be trusted.........after I explain the facts and that what they said was a load of BS about 1/2 of them are fine with it and actually consider AMD systems of the other 50% about half get extremely mad and storm off and the other half still aren't sure but enlarge decide if the AMD system has the same reliability and performance of the intel system, but costs less then they are willing to give it a shot.

Its shocking how un-informed people are.

I once had a person bring in a system they got at frys(frys special) it had a c7 cpu and some HORRIBLE ddr ram, it was pretty pathetic, when I explained that the cpu wasn't capable of what they wanted to do(record video from a tv card that had NO encoding onboard at all) took me alot of explaining to make them understand the SLOW ASS via c7 in the system was NOT DESIGNED FOR THAT and that frys shouldn't have sold them the system for that use, It was a great little netbox tho, just couldnt really deal with what they wanted it for(htpc/mpc)

also getting the person to understand the diffrance between via, amd and intel was....HELL, the guy also argued with me that intel made them all it was just diffrent models ROFL.......

blah, I still stan by the fact that I dont think intel should get out of any of the fines the worlds levied against them, and they did do things that where unethical, You break the law/rules you take your chances, If you get caught, you should just say "aww shit" and pay your bills.
Meecrob you are right about the justice system and money. I won't argue that. As for the Intel part I have to disagree but I do respect your opinion. :toast:
Posted on Reply
#3
Meecrob
TheMailMan78 said:
Meecrob you are right about the justice system and money. I won't argue that. As for the Intel part I have to disagree but I do respect your opinion. :toast:
I have had enough experienceI myself and watching friends/family deal with our in-justice system that I have lost total respect for it.

I know this is a bit off topic but I think its relevant to most people here.

Why is it in the US "justice system" that they say "innocent till proven guilty" then lock you up and do everything they can to prove you did it? Check the laws and job descriptions, In reality its the prosecutors job to insure that the innocent are protected, this should be especialy true when they are falsely accused of a crime.....but its not.

Why is it that somebody can get 6 months in county jail+probation for having a scape bag with some weed crumbs in it, and yet somebody who was DRUNKEN DRIVING can get out of jail the next day(when they sober up) and ends up with a traffic ticket and nothing else?

Why is the RIAA/MPAA/EXCT allowed to run their own little police forces and arrest/sue people?

blah, I could go on and on and on, the fact is our system is screwed up for the same reasons our govt as a whole has gone down the shitter.

I would continue this but I dont want to take the thread any farther OT, basically our system needs formated and reinstalled.
Posted on Reply
#4
a_ump
such a nice debate lol i love threads like this, kinda opens my mind more about legal things as i have no knowledge of legal systems. and its nice to see respectful responses and not insults. it would seem this thread will only go back and forth though :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#5
Sugarush
TheMailMan78 said:
Oh no its not profit. Its "justice". :laugh:

I guess by forcing you mean they had guns to thier children's heads? I ask because thats much more likely to happen than for HP and Dell not to own phones. One phone call to the USFTC would have brought this to a halt. But you know why they didn't call? Because their legal departments at the time saw nothing wrong with what Intel was doing and everyone made a killing. Please there are no victims in this case but Intel.
Intel broke the law, they got a fine as a penalty. Why is everybody so concerned with 'EU cashing in". If you're speeding you get a ticket...

As for the forcing issue: we don't know if the retailers found those rebates OK or not, they might have gone along with it even though they realized it could be illegal.

I'd say the victims are AMD and the consumers. AMD' market share was artificially capped and the consumers didn't get the products they could have gotten (and I mean the average Joe who doesn't know much about computers).
Posted on Reply
#6
rpsgc
Sugarush said:
Intel broke the law, they got a fine as a penalty. Why is everybody so concerned with 'EU cashing in".
Because an American corporation could never do harm, they are always innocent and the EU is just a bunch of greedy socialist commies just because they PUNISH people who BREAK THE LAW unlike in the US where they BRIBE their way out of this situations.


Oh yes, I can generalize too, do you like? Or my post is going to be deleted because I'm not some idiot randomly bashing the EU just because?
Posted on Reply
#7
$ReaPeR$
rpsgc said:
Because an American corporation could never do harm, they are always innocent and the EU is just a bunch of greedy socialist commies just because they PUNISH people who BREAK THE LAW unlike in the US where they BRIBE their way out of this situations.


Oh yes, I can generalize too, do you like? Or my post is going to be deleted because I'm not some idiot randomly bashing the EU just because?
oh come on you know that the bribe its not only an American phenomenon it is used all around the world almost on any chanse given.
i also would like to state that on points i agree with almost everyone. nice conversation:toast:
Posted on Reply
#8
TheMailMan78
Big Member
rpsgc said:
Because an American corporation could never do harm, they are always innocent and the EU is just a bunch of greedy socialist commies just because they PUNISH people who BREAK THE LAW unlike in the US where they BRIBE their way out of this situations.


Oh yes, I can generalize too, do you like? Or my post is going to be deleted because I'm not some idiot randomly bashing the EU just because?
Excellent Troll. I give it a 8/10.
Posted on Reply
#9
Meecrob
TheMailMan78 said:
Excellent Troll. I give it a 8/10.
its called satire/sarcasm, and I agree with his point.

the way I see it, You break the laws you take your chances, when you get caught you shouldn't try and get out of it.

A quote from another member here fits this very well.

DarkNova
if you get imprisoned for murder, you can't turn around and say "this is bullshit, i did it because I got paid to, it was a good business decision" YOU BROKE THE DAMN LAW
Posted on Reply
#10
TheMailMan78
Big Member
Meecrob said:
its called satire/sarcasm, and I agree with his point.

the way I see it, You break the laws you take your chances, when you get caught you shouldn't try and get out of it.

A quote from another member here fits this very well.
No its a troll.

Anyway do you know when this EU law was written and established?
Posted on Reply
#11
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
TheMailMan78 said:
Anyway do you know when this EU law was written and established?
It doesn't matter. You can make a law and enforce it five minutes later. It's still a law.
Posted on Reply
#12
TheMailMan78
Big Member
btarunr said:
It doesn't matter. You can make a law and enforce it five minutes later. It's still a law.
Oh it does matter. It matters a great deal. When was this law established?
Posted on Reply
#13
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
TheMailMan78 said:
Oh it does matter. It matters a great deal. When was this law established?
No it doesn't matter, to no extant. At least not to make a mudsling point.
Posted on Reply
#14
TheMailMan78
Big Member
btarunr said:
No it doesn't matter, to no extant.
If there was no law at the time to make it illegal then no law was broken.
Posted on Reply
#15
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
TheMailMan78 said:
If there was no law at the time to make it illegal then no law was broken.
Pretty much commonsense. They won't take up a case against something that isn't illegal.
Posted on Reply
#16
TheMailMan78
Big Member
btarunr said:
Pretty much commonsense. They won't take up a case against something that isn't illegal.
I want facts. Do you know when the law was established? Because commonsense doesn't take an investigation to establish.
Posted on Reply
#17
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
TheMailMan78 said:
I want facts. Do you know when the law was established? Because commonsense doesn't take an investigation to establish.
Competition Act 1998, Enterprise Act 2002. Both coined well before the legal proceedings against Intel from EU even began. Shared between UK and EU.

http://www.out-law.com/page-5811
Posted on Reply
#18
TheMailMan78
Big Member
btarunr said:
Competition Act 1998, Enterprise Act 2002. Both coined well before the legal proceedings against Intel from EU even began. Shared between UK and EU.

http://www.out-law.com/page-5811
They are being fined for actions well before these dates. Welcome to the EU payday. I rest my case. :cool:
Posted on Reply
#19
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
TheMailMan78 said:
They are being fined for actions well before these dates. Welcome to the EU payday. I rest my case. :cool:
No, for everything it continued doing till it was finally charged.

By the way, I was wrong (in a good way). EC competition law existed since 1994 in Euro-zone countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Community_competition_law
Posted on Reply
#20
erocker
Senior Moderator
I wouldn't get too worked up MailMan, you need to save your energy for when the US starts taking more and more money from taxpayers and businesses. It's starting to happen, it's change we can believe in. :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#21
TheMailMan78
Big Member
erocker said:
I wouldn't get too worked up MailMan, you need to save your energy for when the US starts taking more and more money from taxpayers and businesses. It's starting to happen, it's change we can believe in. :rolleyes:
I know, I know........:shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#22
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
The only change you can really believe in is the one you get in return for a $10 bill....40 quarters :)
Posted on Reply
#23
$ReaPeR$
erocker said:
I wouldn't get too worked up MailMan, you need to save your energy for when the US starts taking more and more money from taxpayers and businesses. It's starting to happen, it's change we can believe in. :rolleyes:
and give them to the banks that created the worldwide economical crisis.
Posted on Reply
#24
Meecrob
TheMailMan78 said:
They are being fined for actions well before these dates. Welcome to the EU payday. I rest my case. :cool:
as bta said, its for stuff they KEPT DOING after the laws where writen, honestly do you think intel stayed on top of the market with the p4 because the p4 was better or cheaper?

$ReaPeR$ said:
and give them to the banks that created the worldwide economical crisis.
welcome to a global ecoimy.

welcome to a nation/world run by lobbists.

the banks lobbied to get the laws changed to allow them to give out sub-prime and high risk loans, then didnt make sure they could cover it when it all went to hell, they made a bunch of money, and spent it on cars, vacations, bonuses for the management, and on and on, BUT had we let them all fail, we would currently be in "the great depression MK2" with even more people out of work standing in souplines.

I dont agree with bailing them out like we have, BUT i dont agree with those who think we should have just let it fail and to hell with the consequences.

I also dont agree with the current public health bill that obama is trying to push into law, BUT I feel we need a national healthcare system, YES it would cost money to get started, but once up and running IF they follow a good example it would SAVE MONEY IN THE LONG RUN.

When an UN-ensured person gets sick or is feeling bad the dont go to doctor, they sit around till it gets so bad they endup in the emergency room, and since enlarge they cant afford to pay for medical care, they dont pay the bill, the govt ends up paying it, costing FAR more then if the person had basic health coverage and went to doctor and got looked at b4 things got really bad.

I saw a great example of this a few weeks back when i was waiting with a family friend in the emergency room, a lady came in, older woman, very friendly BUT she had a huge bulge on her leg, they got her back pretty quick, turned out she had known her leg wasnt right for over 2 weeks and because she didnt have any insurance she didnt see a doctor, it was a bloody SLIVER that got infected, they had to spend over 2hrs giving her iv antibiotics and draining/cleaning it(smelled horrible), im sure the bill is over $3000 (they had to keep her to make sure she didnt get blood poisoning)

had she been insured, she would have gone in, doc would have found the silver, removed it, maby given her a script and been done with it, costing maby 150bucks tops!!!

and she had no $ so she isnt gonna be able to pay her hosp bill, its gonna fall back on the taxpayers!!!

its a pain in the ass, but its how things are currently.

all this fear of having a govt health option and the tax payer having to foot the bill is BULLSHIT stirred up by the private insurers who want to get everybody paying them for "consumer based plans" these plans allow them to dump the people who are costing more then they are feeding into the system AND on top of it dump their medical bills on them as well!!!

BLAH this country needs a reformat and reinstall, its like its running on windows 95 :P
Posted on Reply
#25
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Meecrob said:
as bta said, its for stuff they KEPT DOING after the laws where writen, honestly do you think intel stayed on top of the market with the p4 because the p4 was better or cheaper?
It stayed on top because Intel advertised (remember the Blue Man Group playing with a 4?). Advertisments have the ability to convince a buyer that their product is the best thing since sliced cheese. Obviously, their mind might change once they buy the product but, the transaction has already been completed so hindsight is irrelevant from a sales standpoint. XD
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment