Intel Is Looking to Fight 1.2 Billion EU Antitrust Fine Once Again

[eyecantseeover24fps]

http://deliddedtech.com/2016/06/21/intel-is-looking-to-fight-1-2-billion-eu-antitrust-fine-once-again/

 

Quote

Intel is making yet another attempt to overturn the 1.08 Billion Euro($1.2 Billion USD) fine they received over an anti-trust case regarding attempts to monopolize CPU sales to computer manufacturers. Intel claims that the “2009 EU fine was unfair, wrong, and formalistic”.

 

I really hope Zen is a success, Intel's audacity to defend these types of practices and spend a ton of money on legal battles over it makes me feel like they aren't deserving of my money. It's a shame that AMD currently doesn't offer the same performance as Intel at the high end. Hopefully this changes.

[Suika]

Pretty scummy moves from Intel, I'm curious what makes them think they'd be able to have the ruling overturned.

[SansVarnic]

9 minutes ago, eyecantseeover24fps said:

http://deliddedtech.com/2016/06/21/intel-is-looking-to-fight-1-2-billion-eu-antitrust-fine-once-again/

For those of you that don't remember(or aren't aware), Intel was fined 1.08 Billion Euros years ago for a series of anti-competitive business practices that basically screwed over AMD. This involved things such as requiring computer manufacturers to source 95% of their CPUs from Intel in order to be eligible for rebates, requiring them to delay availability of AMD hardware, etc. Now they're trying again to overturn the ruling. 

 

I really hope Zen is a success, Intel's audacity to defend these types of practices and spend a ton of money on legal battles over it makes me feel like they aren't deserving of my money. It's a shame that AMD currently doesn't offer the same performance as Intel at the high end. Hopefully this changes.

Interesting. I am curious to see how they plan to pull this off, it is not often high profile cases get overturned.

 

(OP, you might wanna review the posting guidelines and clean up your post a bit.)

[marldorthegreat]

4 minutes ago, Suika said:

Pretty scummy moves from Intel, I'm curious what makes them think they'd be able to have the ruling overturned.

Buying power. Lobby groups. Intel is a multi billion dollar company.

[eyecantseeover24fps]

3 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

Interesting. I am curious to see how they plan to pull this off, it is not often high profile cases get overturned.

 

(OP, you might wanna review the posting guidelines and clean up your post a bit.)

Can you elaborate? is my OP too long? I think I fixed it.

[SansVarnic]

2 minutes ago, eyecantseeover24fps said:

Can you elaborate? is my OP too long?

Apologies I meant strengthen not clean up...

 

See below;

Quote

• Your thread must include some original input to tell the reader why it is relevant to them, and what your personal opinion on the topic is.
• Your thread must include a link to at least one reputable source. Most of the time, this should be a respected news site.
• Your thread should also include quotes from the cited source(s). While you shouldn't just copy the entire article, your quote should give the reader a summary of the article in a way that gives the key details, but also leaves room for them to read the full article on the linked website. Please use quote tags (the speech bubble at the top of the editor, under the  :)) to show that you have copied this content from another site.
• The title of your thread must be relevant to the topic and should give a reader a good idea of the contents of the thread. Copying the title of the source is permitted but absolutely not required.
• If your article is about a product or some form of media, images are always appreciated, although they are not required.

[Tedol]

soo, AMD have a chance ? 

[eyecantseeover24fps]

6 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

Apologies I meant strengthen not clean up...

 

See below;

Wait so you're saying I was missing a quote from the article? I added one. Am I good now? I wanna make sure I'm abiding by the rules.

[SansVarnic]

38 minutes ago, eyecantseeover24fps said:

Wait so you're saying I was missing a quote from the article? I added one. Am I good now? I wanna make sure I'm abiding by the rules.

Yeah your good to go.  

You can make your posts as long as you want as long as your including what is required.  

[Curufinwe_wins]

Honestly you guys are being insanely naive and frankly idiotic if you think Intel wouldn't fight this....

 

A 1.2 billion euro fine... 

 

By simple economics (and ignoring the time value of money), if Intel thought it had even a 10% chance to overturn the ruling, it ought to be willing to spend at least 120 million euros to fight for that...

 

But that said, I personally don't think it is the fault of intel that AMD sucks donkey dick and hasn't released an actually new platform in 5 years. OFC this law suit is from long before that time, and I can't argue with the merits of the fine with respect to activities from 2004-2006.

[SansVarnic]

2 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Honestly you guys are being insanely naive and frankly idiotic if you think Intel wouldn't fight this....

 

A 12 billion euro fine... 

 

By simple economics (and ignoring the time value of money), if Intel thought it had even a 10% chance to overturn the ruling, it ought to be willing to spend at least 1.2 billion euros to fight for that...

 

But that said, I personally don't think it is the fault of intel that AMD sucks donkey dick and hasn't released an actually new platform in 5 years.

Couldn't have said it better.

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

Couldn't have said it better.

fixed some math errors in my op btw...

[eyecantseeover24fps]

5 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

fixed some math errors in my op btw...

Yeah, the URL says 12 Billion because decimals would screw up the URL, so it can be a bit misleading. Your point still stands though. Financially, it may be worth it for Intel from a strictly money standpoint. Doesn't change the fact that I think they're greedy and unethical though.

[PlayStation 2]

History's bound to repeat itself if they don't learn.

[Castdeath97]

5 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

But that said, I personally don't think it is the fault of intel that AMD sucks donkey dick and hasn't released an actually new platform in 5 years. OFC this law suit is from long before that time, and I can't argue with the merits of the fine with respect to activities from 2004-2006.

This case isn't just about intel gaining a monopoly simply because AMD sucks but rather because of anti competitive practices from intel such as (from the OP source):

 

Quote

Among these practices included providing computer manufacturers with rebates if 95% of the chips they purchased for personal computers were from Intel, paying retail stores to only stock x86 parts, and paying computer makers to delay launches of AMD hardware

 

Edited June 22, 2016 by Castdeath97
Just noticed the last sentence now, oh well gonna leave this for the others to read.

[Curufinwe_wins]

Simple misunderstanding is simple.

 

Clearly Intel's guilt seems quite assured.

[Castdeath97]

4 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

Did you not read my comment??? See below with the relevant portion highlighted...

 

That's why I placed the editing text, like I said there I did miss the last sentence.

[Curufinwe_wins]

2 minutes ago, Castdeath97 said:

That's why I placed the editing text, like I said there I did miss the last sentence.

Np. I'll fix mine as well.

[Misanthrope]

Let's say you want a race between Usain Bolt and a neckbeard that has barely gotten off a chair for 5 years. 

 

Well know who's gonna win, it still doesn't makes it alright for Usain to jump early, turn around and trip the neckbeard. 

 

We have anti trust laws for a reason: everyone should get a decent shot no matter how unlikely. 

[Trixanity]

The problem with the majority of these "fines" is that the amount they pay is probably a fraction of what they gained (and of what their competitors lost) due to their practices. I mean Intel has paid some single digit billions to AMD in compensation but it's probably at least 2 digit billions they've lost due to Intel's behavior.

[SurvivorNVL]

^  These fines are often just another way for the E.U. or any country to tax a large, rich corporation.  Especially given the fines are normally way, way above what they made from whatever practice they were conducting.

[Trixanity]

28 minutes ago, SurvivorNVL said:

^  These fines are often just another way for the E.U. or any country to tax a large, rich corporation.  Especially given the fines are normally way, way above what they made from whatever practice they were conducting.

There has to be grounds for the fine to be legal. As much of a clusterfuck the EU is, it's not like Russia or China where they just invent shit to seize assets or empty back accounts.

 

Intel has had some bad practices (probably still have some) and Intel has without doubt made a lot of money from it. Very likely orders of magnitude more by doing it. Otherwise they wouldn't do it.

[CTR640]

I hope Intel will lose the battle, they have been cocky way too long. And EA should raise the fine atleast in the 10 of billions.