OT: AMD files suit against Intel

Discussion in 'Dell' started by Craig, Jun 28, 2005.

  1. Craig

    Craig Guest

    Craig, Jun 28, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Craig

    guess Guest

    Give me a fricking break!! AMD can't compete in the marketplace, so they sue
    the industry leader?? That is total bull***t!!!!!!!!!!
     
    guess, Jun 29, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Craig

    snert Guest

    If the statements below are provable, this isn't "competition". It more
    like mafia practices.

    "In one instance, AMD charged, former Compaq Computer CEO Michael Capellas
    said in 2000 that Intel "had a gun to his head" and he would have to stop
    buying from AMD.

    In another instance outlined in the lawsuit, Gateway executives told AMD
    that Intel had "beaten them into 'guacamole"' in retaliation for doing
    business with AMD, according to the papers.

    It also said former Gateway CEO Ted Waitt told AMD that Intel offered him
    large sums not to deal with AMD.
     
    snert, Jun 29, 2005
    #3
  4. Reminder, nothing's been proven in court yet.
     
    Sparky Spartacus, Jun 30, 2005
    #4
  5. Craig

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    Guess you didn't read what the lawsuit was about.

    The lawsuit charges Intel with unfair business practices which *PREVENTED*
    AMD from being able to compete in the marketplace. The suit also charges
    that Intel is the industry leader by using deceptive practices, coercion,
    bribes and threats, all of which have been substantiated to one degree or
    another.

    Next time, try to at least have an inkling of what you are talking about
    before spouting off...

    Man, I hate Intel Fanboys....they never have a clue.

    Bobby
     
    NoNoBadDog!, Jun 30, 2005
    #5
  6. Craig

    PC Medic Guest

    Nothing has been "substantiated" yet, that is why we have trials.
     
    PC Medic, Jun 30, 2005
    #6
  7. Craig

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    Many of the charges *HAVE* been substantiated by sworn affidavits and
    testimony from
    various sources. The trials are to determine the culpability of Microsoft
    and what damages, if any, are to be assessed. In the Japanese ruling, sworn
    statements from many of the parties involved in the case are now public
    record. These statements, having been accepted as part of the proceedings,
    are considered of sufficient merit as to be included in the trial there. In
    addition, the statements and subsequent testimony, if any, in the US trial,
    is "substantiated". I won't get into semantics here with you...The courts
    will not accept testimony that has either no bearing on the matter at hand,
    or that cannot be verified in some way. The trial is to decide guilt or
    innocence on the part of Microsoft, and if guilty, what level of liability
    and what level of punishment is appropriate.

    Bobby
     
    NoNoBadDog!, Jun 30, 2005
    #7
  8. How'd we go from Intel to Microsoft? Are you recycling boilerplate from
    the MS antitrust trial by any chance?

    I'm not defending Intel; but they're not guilty of anything until found
    guilty in court, no matter how many affidavits or how much testimony you
    have.
     
    Sparky Spartacus, Jun 30, 2005
    #8
  9. Craig

    Tom Scales Guest

    You're confusing alledged and proven.

    I can swear an affidavit that the sun is green, but that doesn't PROVE the
    sun is green.

    Still need a TRIAL to establish proof.

    I don't have any skin in this game. Maybe they did it, maybe they didn't,
    but it has NOT been proven.

    Tom
     
    Tom Scales, Jun 30, 2005
    #9
  10. Craig

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    Many of the allegations were proven by the Tokyo High Court, Tokyo District
    Court and the Fair Trade Commission of Japan. Now AMD is bringing the same
    allegations to the United Staes District Court. Intel was found to have
    violated anti trust laws; The Japanese agency raided Intel's Japan offices
    in 2004 and came to the conclusion that the chipmaker's local unit had
    stifled competition by offering rebates to five Japanese PC makers--Fujitsu,
    Hitachi, NEC, Sony and Toshiba--that agreed not to buy or to limit their
    purchases of chips made by AMD and Transmeta.
    Additionally, the European Commission is investigating Intel's marketing
    techniques.

    While the filing in the United States and subsequent filing in Japan
    (yesterday), AMD intends to not only seem conpensation for the damages
    already proven, but to seek additional damages based upon additional
    instances of unfair business practices. There are new allegations
    pertaining to the specifics of the US filing, but there are proven unfair
    practives comitted by Intel.

    My point is that many of the "allegations" *ARE* proven.

    Agreed a trail is necessary, but anyone who knows anything about the
    business side of the industry know just how "dirty" Intel is in this issue.
    It is one thing to be the "bi dog on the porch". It is another thing
    altoghether to attack, bully or frighten anyone wanting to interact with the
    other "dogs on the porch".



    Here is a link with better details:

    http://www.informationweek.com/stor...2J2DNYQSNDBGCKHSCJUMEKJVN?articleID=164903512



    Bobby
     
    NoNoBadDog!, Jun 30, 2005
    #10
  11. Craig

    Tom Scales Guest

    Just curious, are you not in the US? The US court system couldn't care less
    that Japan found them guilty. Their standards may be quite different.

    Innocent until proven guilty.

    Haven't been yet.

    No US Court is going to roll over with another countries verdict. I wouldn't
    be surprised if Intel got everything about those trials squashed.

    Tom
     
    Tom Scales, Jun 30, 2005
    #11
  12. Craig

    PC Medic Guest

    Ummm, we are talking about the same lawsuit here, aren't we...as in AMD vs
    Intel
     
    PC Medic, Jul 1, 2005
    #12
  13. Craig

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    Yes, I do live in the US. However, the case will have significant impact on
    the US and the Japanese cases (AMD filed an additional 2 suits in Japan
    yesterday). It will be admissisable to bring evidence that Intel has a
    history of illegal practices in it's overseas dealings; since Intel is a US
    owned company, it's activities anywhere in the world can be used as
    precedent to it's activities anywhere else in the world. It is the same
    concept in many types of legal proceedings; Past history, particularly
    adjudicated past history, is acceptable as part or parcel of a subsequent
    hearing if the activity is related (which in this case it is). My only
    point in this whole issue is that Intel is not absolutely innocent in this
    case. Recent legal decisions prove that Intel engages in illegal and unfair
    business practices; there is no reason to assume that it does so in only
    one country; therefore any evidence of illegal activity in any venue can be
    used to support an allegation of illegal practices in another area. Since
    Intel has been found guilty several times in the past of illegal business
    practices, there is a precedent involved that will more than likely be
    introduced; it will show a pattern and a prescribed manner of doing business
    as established by
    Intel.

    Bobby
     
    NoNoBadDog!, Jul 1, 2005
    #13
  14. Craig

    Tom Scales Guest

    Are you an attorney? Sounds suspiciously like you're an attorney for AMD!

    Tom
     
    Tom Scales, Jul 1, 2005
    #14
  15. Craig

    NoNoBadDog! Guest

    No, not an attorney; but I am very much interested in this case. I am
    curious what the landscape of the market would look like if Intel did not
    throw it's weight around. I am simply someone who happens to think, based
    upon personal experience and also research by others, that AMD makes a
    product that is significantly better than what Intel makes (single and dual
    core, 32 bit or 64 bit).
    I would like to see AMD have the ability to rise to whatever level it can
    without any interference from Intel.

    Bobby
     
    NoNoBadDog!, Jul 1, 2005
    #15
  16. Craig

    snert Guest

    Low blow, very low blow...
     
    snert, Jul 1, 2005
    #16
  17. Craig

    User N Guest

    I read the complaint:

    http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAssets/AMD-Intel_Full_Complaint.pdf

    I can honestly say that the allegations do not suprise me at all. In
    fact, what would surprise me is if Intel *didn't* do things of that
    nature. Market leaders in all industries tend to throw their weight
    around and in an effort to increase their own sales, actively work
    to limit/sabotage the sales of the competition using all sorts of
    strong arm tactics. I once new a guy who owned convenience
    stores, and I can remember him expressing frustration over the
    way soft drink, snack food, and cigarette reps fought for display
    and shelf space. As he put it... it isn't just business, it is personal;
    they fight for dominance with the same tenacity as professional
    athletes.
     
    User N, Jul 1, 2005
    #17
  18. Craig

    S.Lewis Guest


    He didn't accuse you of working for microsoft, at least.

    ;-)


    Stew
     
    S.Lewis, Jul 1, 2005
    #18
  19. Regardless of the parties involved, there are several points of law.

    1. Sits brought without merit are routinely thrown out of court after
    filing. If they are brought to trial and then found to be without merit,
    the accused wins. Which leads to a counter suit and damages awarded if and
    usually when won.

    2. This is a corporate case and the rules differ greatly from criminal
    cases. Liability can be fixed and quantified at differing levels and so
    there are fewer absolutes to base a final decision on. That is partly why
    such cases can and do drag on for decades.

    3. The US courts can and do refer to prior and/or concurrent bad acts
    committed outside of their jurisdiction. If the court reviews and finds
    that the case and it's findings have merit under US law and have a bearing
    on the case before them they be taken into consideration. A matter of
    jurisprudence, we respect their laws and they respect ours.

    4. Tranmetal is done for, but they could still file suit as well in all of
    the jurisdictions that AMD has and site the AMD vs. Intel cases. So Intel
    faces a second round with a well armed opponent in every jurisdiction that
    they lose to AMD in.

    5. There is also the matter of fair trade practices should the US do
    nothing to chastise it's companies when they misbehave overseas.

    And no I'm not a lawyer, lol

    KC
    5.
     
    Kevin Childers, Jul 1, 2005
    #19
  20. Craig

    Steve W. Guest

    I don't see one thing that Intel did that was illegal in the US. Did
    they go to manufacturers and say " Hey if you buy all your chips from us
    we'll give you a price break" Yes.
    Is that illegal NO. AMD COULD have done the same thing, why didn't
    they????

    Sounds just like the rest of the bullshit lawsuits brought by companies
    that just can't hack the real world.
     
    Steve W., Jul 1, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.