Vice President and General Manager of AMD Radeon Gaming accuses NVIDIA GPP of monopolistic and anti competitive practices

[asus killer]

19 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

AMD can't really do much about it: they just don't have enough money to sue Nvidia at this moment. I think their angle is trying to get somebody like the EU to help them move forward legally (which they should btw)

even if all they want is some government (EU for example) to start an investigation, they can just ask for it, no need for this tweets, or better yet they can tweet it's just pointless.

 

spotify did it

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/13/16773806/spotify-deezer-eu-regulators-apple

[Misanthrope]

2 hours ago, asus killer said:

even if all they want is some government (EU for example) to start an investigation, they can just ask for it, no need for this tweets, or better yet they can tweet it's just pointless.

 

spotify did it

https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/13/16773806/spotify-deezer-eu-regulators-apple

Well the other option is that they know they actually wouldn't have that solid of a case: nobody really knows the terms of GPP after all I wouldn't put it past AMD to basically poison the well instead of leaking the actual terms which may be more benign than described.

[Humbug]

34 minutes ago, Misanthrope said:

Well the other option is that they know they actually wouldn't have that solid of a case: nobody really knows the terms of GPP after all I wouldn't put it past AMD to basically poison the well instead of leaking the actual terms which may be more benign than described.

I'm sure AMD knows what the terms are based on their relationships with people at the partners, but providing evidence of it in court and proving it is illegal is a different story.

 

3 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

AMD can't really do much about it: they just don't have enough money to sue Nvidia at this moment. I think their angle is trying to get somebody like the EU to help them move forward legally (which they should btw)

Or at the very least try to gain some PR mileage from it...

[Razor01]

1 hour ago, Humbug said:

I'm sure AMD knows what the terms are based on their relationships with people at the partners, but providing evidence of it in court and proving it is illegal is a different story.

 

Or at the very least try to gain some PR mileage from it...

 

 

You don't need PR mileage if they have the contracts (terms) and if there is anything illegal in them lol. Its cut and dry lol.  Either AMD doesn't have access to the contracts, or its illegal for them to have them, or there is no proof in the contracts.  Pick your poison.  I think AMD has the contracts they are closer to this than Kyle, and for them to shop around for reporters, they must know what is going on.  Now if its illegal for them to have the contracts, then they are in hot water as it is.  But they don't need to share that info to the court directly to do their thing.  This is also where the FTC and EU commission will step in, they will get the contracts on AMD's behalf by getting information from the AIB partners directly.  AMD needs to do nothing but let them know they are getting hurt and how they are getting hurt.

 

No need for this drama to be played out, if anything it waters down the potential lawsuit or ramifications against nV.  And it also makes AMD look bad in the eyes of the court.

 

Just for instances did you see AMD talk about what Intel was doing prior to the court case being opened?  Nope they kept their mouth shut till they went to court.

 

Once it went to court, well its all public knowledge so yeah reporters went and asked them about it and PR got involved sending out pre rehearsed statements and what not.

 

Common sense tells us if AMD was capable of taking this court they would have done it the same way they did it with Intel, just hit with the suit and be done with it.

 

Everything they have done till this point and so far what we know of the GPP is the total opposite of what AMD did with Intel lol.

[Okjoek]

Sadly AdoredTV is right. It's a negative feedback loop. nVIDIA has mindshare, gamers want nVIDIA, That's money AMD isn't making, thus they have no money for R&D to build competitive hardware.

[XenosTech]

I'd say for all the shit AMD has had to endure from Intel and Nvida they're doing well in a sense, they haven't gone belly up like most otehr companies would have in their position.

[Notional]

Are there really anyone who still don't see how scummy NVidia is being here? If you don't want to extrapolate a conclusion from the flurry of information, then you just choose not to believe it. That's fine, but it is also naive.

AMD would not say these things, if they don't have absolute concrete knowledge about it. Otherwise they would open themselves up to a massive lawsuit from NVidia. But NVidia has been surprisingly lame and passive in all this. That seems out of character from the company that sued every company and their mom, who used any graphics in them, trying to force them into an NVidia GPU architecture license programme. Remember that scummy practice from NVidia?

 

I do hope AMD and the vendors will feed the FTC and EUC with this information. This is unacceptable and should not be condoned by anything, especially consumers.

[Razor01]

37 minutes ago, Notional said:

Are there really anyone who still don't see how scummy NVidia is being here? If you don't want to extrapolate a conclusion from the flurry of information, then you just choose not to believe it. That's fine, but it is also naive.

AMD would not say these things, if they don't have absolute concrete knowledge about it. Otherwise they would open themselves up to a massive lawsuit from NVidia. But NVidia has been surprisingly lame and passive in all this. That seems out of character from the company that sued every company and their mom, who used any graphics in them, trying to force them into an NVidia GPU architecture license programme. Remember that scummy practice from NVidia?

 

I do hope AMD and the vendors will feed the FTC and EUC with this information. This is unacceptable and should not be condoned by anything, especially consumers.

IF the FTC and EUC get involved it will be they have enough proof something underhanded is going on, AMD and AIB's will be forced to give them info as will nV lol.  There is no need for them to "feed" info.  Maybe you used the wrong word there.

 

Even for the investigation to take place FTC and EU needs strong enough evidence that something bad is going on and it must fall in line with the rules and laws they have already set in place. 

 

Going against multi billion dollar corporations costs their tax payers multi millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars.  That is why they need to be sure they can win in such a case before they even think about going after a case.  If they don't win guess who pays their bills, we do.  If they win the corporation that they win against pays the bills on top of the or part of the fines.

[Notional]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

IF they FTC and EUC get involved it will be they have enough proof something underhanded is going on, AMD and AIB's will be forced to give them info lol.

 

Even for the investigation to take place FTC and EU needs strong enough evidence that something bad is going on and it must fall in line with the rules and laws they have already set in place. 

 

Going against multi billion dollar corporations costs their tax payers multi millions if not hundreds of millions of dollars.  That is why they need to be sure they can win in such a case before they even think about going after a case.

Yes? Of course proof needs to be given. If the FTC or EUC asks for it, none of these companies (including NVidia) can refuse to deliver. EU has already kicked the butts of Microsoft, Google, Apple and Intel. NVidia is a small fry EU could easily brutalize, if they smell blood.

[Razor01]

12 minutes ago, Notional said:

Yes? Of course proof needs to be given. If the FTC or EUC asks for it, none of these companies (including NVidia) can refuse to deliver. EU has already kicked the butts of Microsoft, Google, Apple and Intel. NVidia is a small fry EU could easily brutalize, if they smell blood.

 

Yeah and so far everything AMD has done tells us there is no blood

 

See there are two ways around doing things in court, the wrong way and the right way.

The right way, bring on the lawsuit, which unearths tangible wrong doings, because at this point things start to come out in the open.  Then the EU and FTC step in and get the ball rolling on getting the evidence they need to go after the company with anti trust. 

 

This is exactly how it was played out with Intel.  AMD sued Intel first after they had a notion of what was going on.  Then Intel had to present things they were doing with OEM's and OEM's stated what Intel was doing.  After that the EU and FTC did more investigation and went after Intel for anti trust.  The reason why its done in the US first, is because in the US the defendant must prove he is not doing what the plaintiff is accusing him of doing.  Which pretty much forces the defendant's hand to be shown.  EU is the opposite, the plaintiff must prove with abundance of proof, which is sometimes very hard to get, that the defendant is doing something wrong.  So if it works out well in the US and FTC is able to bring on the case, then the EU takes that info since its all open now and proceeds.  If you look at the history of EU cases against US companies, you will see corresponding cases of those same companies vs FTC (US) lol.

 

AMD didn't and doesn't need to go to the public to get this information.  Kyle is full of himself if he thinks the press is that important with things like this lol.  This isn't a whistler blower incident, where no one knows what is going on other than the company that is doing harm, the potential company that can get hurt knows already what is going on lol.  And we can definitely read the lines between all the lines that are missing from Kyle's articles too.

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 hour ago, Notional said:

AMD would not say these things, if they don't have absolute concrete knowledge about it. Otherwise they would open themselves up to a massive lawsuit from NVidia. But NVidia has been surprisingly lame and passive in all this. That seems out of character from the company that sued every company and their mom, who used any graphics in them, trying to force them into an NVidia GPU architecture license programme. Remember that scummy practice from NVidia?

Until this actually hurts their reputation, I don't think NVIDIA would bother trying to start up a lawsuit. Those things aren't cheap even if you believe you have a clear shot at winning.

 

Also my memory is hazy, I'd like something about that whole NVIDIA suing everyone and their mom for trying to use a graphics thing.

[GDRRiley]

11 hours ago, Tech_Dreamer said:

AMD need to bring in a competitive product first, you can complain all you want , but second best option every time when they release something isn't gonna cut it in this industry. they will control the market even without this.

well AMD did in the early 2000s vs intel and this is what intel did to an extreme. 

 

You should have to be ahead to not get cheated out of sales.

[Notional]

36 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

Snip, you really got to get to the point faster and keep it short - Notional

See answer below.

15 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Until this actually hurts their reputation, I don't think NVIDIA would bother trying to start up a lawsuit. Those things aren't cheap even if you believe you have a clear shot at winning.

 

Also my memory is hazy, I'd like something about that whole NVIDIA suing everyone and their mom for trying to use a graphics thing.

That's exactly what is going on here. AMD only has hearsay, and as such cannot start a lawsuit. Or maybe they can and are just waiting for more concrete evidence.

 

Either way, the GPP has already tarnished NVidia within the gaming community. Sure the fanboys defends it, but vendor agnostic consumers, who knows about this stuff, don't like what they are seeing. The vendors don't like what they are coerced into either. Just like the moronic Kepler License Program, this might end up backfiring massively on NVidia. Consumers don't like scummy business practices, regardless of the company doing it.

[Razor01]

8 minutes ago, Notional said:

See answer below.

That's exactly what is going on here. AMD only has hearsay, and as such cannot start a lawsuit. Or maybe they can and are just waiting for more concrete evidence.

 

Either way, the GPP has already tarnished NVidia within the gaming community. Sure the fanboys defends it, but vendor agnostic consumers, who knows about this stuff, don't like what they are seeing. The vendors don't like what they are coerced into either. Just like the moronic Kepler License Program, this might end up backfiring massively on NVidia. Consumers don't like scummy business practices, regardless of the company doing it.

Scummy business practices don't make EU and FTC go for anti trust cases lol.  They must be breaking specific laws for them to do so.

 

Exactly what you just stated, if the EU and FTC or AMD go at this half cocked, which AMD isn't going after this at all from what we have seen (to me and every IP attorney that I talked to looks like they aren't even remotely interested in taking this to court by their current actions), which should tell you something huge right there.  They will get screwed.  Not only do they lose out on potential gains of a suit but they also lose out with attorney's fees, which no one would be stupid enough to lose just because they have a few million dollars extra cash lying around.  Not only that it will give grounds for nV to counter sue them for many more damages and lawyer costs.  Which then the public and AMD need to pay.

[Zodiark1593]

11 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

I can certainly see your point but that doesn't give Nvidia a free pass to try and extinguish them especially since, as you said, they're not really competing already so why go so hard on the scheme at all?

While not a free pass (there are legal routes), Nvidia's superior position severely limits what the purchaser can do to disourage anticompetitive behavior. If one is in need of 1080 TI performance, for example, there is literally no other substitute, so the "voting with the wallet" mantra would not apply. Nvidia pretty much has the datacenter market under it's heels as well.

 

If AMD can produce offerings that are sufficiently close to Nvidia's best, customers needing high-end performance can then opt to give Nvidia the middle finger.

[Notional]

1 minute ago, Razor01 said:

Scummy business practices don't make EU and FTC go for anti trust cases lol.  They must be breaking specific laws for them to do so.

 

Exactly what you just stated, if the EU and FTC or AMD go at this this half cocked, which AMD isn't going after this at all from what we have seen (to me and every IP attorney that I talked to looks like they are even remotely interested in taking this to court), which should tell you something huge right there.  They will get screwed.  Not only do they lose out on potential gains of a suit but they also lose out with attorney's fees, which no one would be stupid enough to lose just because they have a few million dollars extra cash lying around.

It can if it's illegal. But my point is, the way AMD is handling this, is less of a legal matter, and more as a marketing push. If they win a lawsuit, then what? A hundred million dollars in compensation? What if they get a huge part of the consumer base to turn against NVidia and move to AMD on their next purchase? AMD is in the fantastic situation, that they are (so far) the only company to make high end CPU's AND GPU's. That can create a synergy in buying patterns. Using this to turn the consumers against NVidia is far more of a benefit to AMD than spending millions on drawn out lawsuits... "lol".

[Razor01]

1 hour ago, Notional said:

It can if it's illegal. But my point is, the way AMD is handling this, is less of a legal matter, and more as a marketing push. If they win a lawsuit, then what? A hundred million dollars in compensation? What if they get a huge part of the consumer base to turn against NVidia and move to AMD on their next purchase? AMD is in the fantastic situation, that they are (so far) the only company to make high end CPU's AND GPU's. That can create a synergy in buying patterns. Using this to turn the consumers against NVidia is far more of a benefit to AMD than spending millions on drawn out lawsuits... "lol".

IF its illegal, its a big IF, and look either way the public gets the info but if it happens prior to the case being opened up its taints the the views of how Judges and the court sees things and it makes their job that much harder to weed through the muck.  Its literally taking an advantage AMD has in court, the court is always in favor of the plaintiff here in the US because the burden of proof is on the defendant, and making it a disadvantage.  Once it goes to court everyone will know what is going on, its public knowledge anyways.  The same results are reached if they go to the press prior to going to court or they go to court first and everything is made public lol.

 

But if the case comes first that way the court doesn't need to worry about Tom, Dick, and Harry in the public mouthing off as well.  There will be no "public opinion" to sway the court.

 

With the way they are in the marketplace currently in graphics good luck with that second part, because at the moment, if you had the choice of getting a nV and AMD card, the public is saying how much in favor of nV?  70% plus, probably higher in just gaming.

 

I'll give you an example, I work at NBC, but I do work for all the TV subsidiaries of NBC too like USA, telemundo, Universal, etc.  My main goal is to do projects for that NBC approves to do through these other guys.  I talk to NBC uppers about the projects I'm working on.  I do not talk to the subsidiaries prior to certain times when they are keyed in.  I will not work on a project that those subsidiaries are given direct access to me or my team members.  Why are things like that in place?  Because I don't want to hear the noise if they are unhappy or they want things changed before those designated times they are supposed to be keyed in.  This is because if they are involved in things like that, I can't do my job properly.  My job is to protect NBC's bottom line and to protect the project.  This gives me total control over my team and job and resources to things properly over 20 different projects going on at once.  If those guys are involved in my day to day tasks there is no way anything will get done, it will be meeting after meeting after meeting and we end up with shit at the end.   And all the excuses in the world won't save me from getting fired.  End result it I couldn't do my job.

 

In the same way if public opinion is swayed to either side (plaintiff or defendant) if a judge and court cannot go in the direction of public opinion due to what ever reasons (court procedures), it will hurt them at a personal level.

[Tech Enthusiast]

12 hours ago, Humbug said:

 

 

Agree with this as a consumer.

 

I absolutely can and do decide which company's practices I currently prefer as a consumer, and I will choose to spend my money accordingly and also state my opinion on it when appropriate.

 

The legality and criminality aspect of it however requires not only laws to be broken, but also sufficient evidence to be exposed.

 

 

 

Wish more people would stand up to their believes.

Including me.

I simply don't care enough for companies bashing each others head in,... to buy an inferior product.

 

Whether it is illegal or not greatly depends on the country i guess. And if demanding something like an exclusive brand for all the things they do is "bad" is also up for debate.

Personally i think it should be their right do demand that, but i guess US law is quite funny in that regard. You don't seem to be allowed to take something, you are only allowed to give stuff for free. So yeah, i don't care enough.

 

I will keep buying whatever product meets my demand at the time i upgrade. If AMD finally offers a solid product and not only do smack talk, i am fine with that as well. At the end of the day my FPS are limited by the power i have in my machine and not by how much AMD can talk about how great they are, or NVidia bending laws in the US.

Not like any company would do anything for free or without the hope of getting a profit out of it.

 

Kinda funny tho that the underdog is always the good guy and the one dominating the market is always the bad guy haha.

[Tech Enthusiast]

54 minutes ago, Notional said:

the way AMD is handling this, is less of a legal matter, and more as a marketing push. What if they get a huge part of the consumer base to turn against NVidia and move to AMD on their next purchase? 

 

Sounds like a gentle dream.

Did something like this EVER happen, like ever? Honest question.

Did the masses ever pick to buy inferior products, just to bash a company?

 

Yes, they will win a few people. But will this number even be noticeable for either company?

The masses will keep buying whatever is best for them. And not what is best for a company they have zero stock in.

[Notional]

21 minutes ago, Rattenmann said:

Sounds like a gentle dream.

Did something like this EVER happen, like ever? Honest question.

Did the masses ever pick to buy inferior products, just to bash a company?

 

Yes, they will win a few people. But will this number even be noticeable for either company?

The masses will keep buying whatever is best for them. And not what is best for a company they have zero stock in.

What inferior products are you talking about? Would someone buy a vega 64 instead of a 1080ti? Probably not. Would someone get a vega 64 instead of a 1080? Probably. A 580 instead of a 1060? Probably.

 

Look at EA. Once the consumer market turns on a company, it gets ugly fast.

[Razor01]

19 minutes ago, Notional said:

What inferior products are you talking about? Would someone buy a vega 64 instead of a 1080ti? Probably not. Would someone get a vega 64 instead of a 1080? Probably. A 580 instead of a 1060? Probably.

 

Look at EA. Once the consumer market turns on a company, it gets ugly fast.

 

Yeah look at EA, they are still the largest publisher in the world, and still the most profitable one at that.

 

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-01-30-ea-makes-q3-loss-despite-rising-in-digital-revenue

 

Quote

For the year ending March 31, 2018, EA expects to earn $5.1 billion in revenue, and $1.015 billion in net in profit.

 

And lets see, where are those market share figures again. Lets look at steam for the individual cards?  lets make a poll here and see what cards people have and compare?

 

Now you are trying to compare this EA to what nV is?  What other games can consumers play that are like EA games, quite a few right?  What video cards are consumers going to buy if they don't want nV's.  AMD's, all of AMD's cards, current line up can't do what nV cards can do.  nV knows this.  AMD knows this, the public knows this.

[Deus Voltage]

21 minutes ago, Razor01 said:

 

Yeah look at EA, they are still the largest publisher in the world, and still the most profitable one at that.

 

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2018-01-30-ea-makes-q3-loss-despite-rising-in-digital-revenue

 

 

And lets see, where are those market share figures again. Lets look at steam for the individual cards?  lets make a poll here and see what cards people have and compare?

 

Now you are trying to compare this EA to what nV is?  What other games can consumers play that are like EA games, quite a few right?  What video cards are consumers going to buy if they don't want nV's.  AMD's, all of AMD's cards, current line up can't do what nV cards can do.  nV knows this.  AMD knows this, the public knows this.

I believe the comparison to EA is from a reputation standpoint, not monopolistic practices or market share (Though both the former and the latter can affect one another).

 

[Tech Enthusiast]

58 minutes ago, Notional said:

Probably.

 

Look at EA. Once the consumer market turns on a company, it gets ugly fast.

According to the market share, probably not, no.

Also those that factor electrical bills into the price probably don't. (power is not as cheap for most of the world, "sadly" the EU tries to get away from coal and such, so we pay more than twice as much as the US peeps do).

 

Then again, i seem to not have been 100% clear. I don't care which team has the inferior product. The other team gets my money. If AMD can do better than NVidia, they get my money. Both teams do crap i dislike a lot, but again: Why would i care how they bash each others head in, when all i need is a GPU that does whatever i want it to.

 

And about EA: Uhm, exactly my point. I have yet to see a shitstorm like they got. And yet, they are doing just great. I doubt the public would go into arms like that over the NVidia thing. After all it is greatly up for debate if what they do is actually bad. Not something the masses would get their pitchforks out for.

[Razor01]

24 minutes ago, Deus Voltage said:

I believe the comparison to EA is from a reputation standpoint, not monopolistic practices or market share (Though both the former and the latter can affect one another).

 

Right but they are still doing fine lol, it hurt them in one quarter, but how about the others?  Things like that don't have any sustain ability.

[Master Disaster]

27 minutes ago, Deus Voltage said:

I believe the comparison to EA is from a reputation standpoint, not monopolistic practices or market share (Though both the former and the latter can affect one another).

 

A side note to this point, remember EA basically admitted that what happened with SWBF2 probably wouldn't affect their revenue or profit for that quarter.

 

For every person that boycotts a company there's another 10 who buy from them anyway, large corporations like the ones we're talking about really don't care what the consumers say or do, they know that their products will continue to sell regardless.

 

It's the same for EA, Ubisoft, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, IBM, Dell, Acer, Razer, Ford, Volkswagen, Disney, Fox, (insert any multi billion dollar corporation name here). Big names sell products, it's a fundamental rule of consumerism.