AMD Files AntiTrust Lawsuit Against Intel in Federal Court

[uclajd]

AMD Files AntiTrust Lawsuit Against Intel in Federal Court (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050628043815368)

AMD has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel in US District Court for the District of Delaware. They allege in their complaint that "for over a decade, Intel has unlawfully maintained its monopoly by engaging in a relentless, worldwide campaign to coerce customers to refrain from dealing with AMD." They say that in the past several years, Intel's conduct has become "increasingly egregious" as AMD "has achieved technological leadership in critical aspects of the microprocessor architechture."

If you can't beat 'em, sue 'em I guess.

[Kunaak]

with Intel getting screwed in japan recently, and if I recall, banned from selling anything for 3 months in japan, and having some rather strong proof, that they were selling CPU's at dirt cheap prices if they agreed to only supply Intel chips... its about time AMD stood up for themself, and stopped taking it all, and just ignoring it.

everyone knows intel is a monopoly, mainly due to dells backing.
about time AMD spoke up about it.

[uclajd]

everyone knows intel is a monopoly, mainly due to dells backing. about time AMD spoke up about it.Remember, there is nothing illegal about being a monopoly. Wrongfully obtaining or maintaining a monopoly is illegal.

I can't speak to Japan's legal system or the facts of that case.

FWIW JD

[Donnie27]

Remember, there is nothing illegal about being a monopoly. Wrongfully obtaining or maintaining a monopoly is illegal.

I can't speak to Japan's legal system or the facts of that case.

FWIW JD

I can't either but here a repost of mine from another thread and Forum.

After I got through rolling on the floor laughing my F%*%&$@ @ss off long loud hard and until it hurt, I started to post to you. If Intel were to loose a case like this, all of their lawyers need to be fired and replaced with newbie lawyers fresh out of school.

It's not Intel's fault AMD chooses to go with a process and platform that cost more to make, has less or fewer good yeilds and that's what forced their prices to be higher.

When asked about their (AMD) high prices on X2, an AMD Spokeswoman said; "We sell our processors based on performance". Tell me, what in the hell does that have to do with Intel?

I'm sure Intel left better performing but harder to make processors on the cutting room floor. AMD has built onto K7, not started a completely new anything. "Built it in from the start". Then they still got problems? innovation?

""Intel's behavior is much more than meets the eye. You may not have been aware, but Intel's illegal actions hurt consumers - everyday. Computer buyers pay higher prices inflated by Intel's monopoly profits. Less innovation is produced because less competition exists. Purchasers lose their fundamental right to choose the best technology available."""

Intel spends about half of its almost 11 billion in profits on R&D, about a Billion on the RAM makers to sure up that industry, even its old foe Micron was saved with a 400 million investment from Intel. This allowed then to break even and stay out of the Red.

Now let's compare that to AMD. AMD has invested NOTHING in the memory but prefers to sit back and ride other's R&D. Intel has a strong case to sue AMD + the Germans + the EU for trying to shut markets to Intel and IBM to maximized their return on investing in AMD. Oh, they invested over 1.5 Billion in the new plant FAB 36 and about 2.5 B in all on Fab 30 that AMD is still paying for. Not to mention Tax credits and other grants for it German workforce through its Pork Barrel deal.

They're FOS LOL!

Donnie27

[uclajd]

Look, I might have strong conservative leanings, but I am also for antitrust enforcement when it is warranted (there is little difference between a single monopoly and socialism, when you think about it). If Intel is making profits on all of its deals, even with Dell, then I'm OK with it. If Intel is predatory pricing, then that's a problem. And I don't like the idea of enforcing antitrust when one company says, "don't deal with my competitor, as I am cheaper".

The funny thing is AMD often charges more (and is losing money, while Intel makes a profit).

One thing I do know about Europe is that their antitrust enforcement is much more rigid than even the most liberal US Justice Department (e.g., Reno).

I do wonder what Intel's margins are for Dells. :confused:

I can't either but here a repost of mine from another thread and Forum.

[Donnie27]

Look, I might have strong conservative leanings, but I am also for antitrust enforcement when it is warranted (there is little difference between a single monopoly and socialism, when you think about it). If Intel is making profits on all of its deals, even with Dell, then I'm OK with it. If Intel is predatory pricing, then that's a problem. And I don't like the idea of enforcing antitrust when one company says, "don't deal with my competitor, as I am cheaper".

The funny thing is AMD often charges more (and is losing money, while Intel makes a profit).

One thing I do know about Europe is that their antitrust enforcement is much more rigid than even the most liberal US Justice Department (e.g., Reno).

I do wonder what Intel's margins are for Dells. :confused:

But AMD just said they charge according to performance and NOT Intel. If their sales are slow because they can't build enough Hammers, it's AMD's fault, NOT Intel's. Most of the industry don't want AthlonXP and that was the only thing AMD could RAMP up. Yet, Dell along could use up every processor AMD makes of any kind in a year and still come up short.

Even after their Second Fab comes on line, they're still stuck if they can't get better yields. I'd loved to see them have great yields and them be able to afford an X2 or two. Again, Intel is NOT the reason the lowest priced selling X2 is being sold for $589. If we listen to the folks at AMD, then Intel should be selling their 820 for about $450, right? Yes the AMD $589 is much faster, but is it over a 100% faster as its costs show? People all over the web said things like, "AMD snatched defest from the jaws of Victory." Then they blame Intel? Intel has been know to be Slim-Ball Sleeze bags, but not this time. Look at what AMD did with AthlonXP to gain market share? In 5 weeks, $999 processor dipped down to $200 to under cut Intel, where were the lawsuits then?

THe EU did quite a bit to shut Intel out of markets and this was done to give AMD a leg up, not because anyone was trying to be *fair. The strict Laws had nothing to do with it.

http://techreport.com/ja.zz?id=38251

""I would like to thank the taxpayers of Germany, Saxony, and the EU for subsidizing cheap chips for us all.""

Is that fair to Intel? What if each Country Intel had a Fab in did the same thing?
http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/32799.html
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-5154539.html

The EU investigates Intel (http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2001apr/bch20010406005269.htm)

EU at it again. (http://www.networkworld.com/news/2004/0421euinves.html)

Europe Hunts Intel (http://articles.fool.com/coms2/summary_0268-mft04060822_ITM)

These links can go on for several threads in lenght. I didn't just make any of this up. The EU and Germany want a return on their investment and want it as soon as possible.

Meanwhile;

Intel invests in RAMBUS (http://www.techweb.com/article/printableArticleSrc.jhtml?articleID=29106216)

PCWorld.com - Intel Invests in Wi-Fi

Intel invests in Wi-Fi VOIP and hotel-access companies - Computerworld

Slashdot | Intel Invests 12 Million Euro in SuSE (http://av.rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyJ6jHsJCF9gAeD6QCqMX;_ylu=X3oDMTByZGlsODk wBHBndANhdl9pZXBhbmVfcmVzdWx0BHNlYwNzcg--/SIG=127pi7390/EXP=1120104483/**http%3a//slashdot.org/articles/99/11/24/1550200.shtml)

X-bit labs - Hardware news - Intel Invests $450 Million in Micron Technology. (http://av.rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyJ6jHsJCF9gAej6QCqMX;_ylu=X3oDMTByZGlsODk wBHBndANhdl9pZXBhbmVfcmVzdWx0BHNlYwNzcg--/SIG=12jgg7scr/EXP=1120104483/**http%3a//www.xbitlabs.com/news/memory/display/20030925041536.html)

Intel Invest in AMD LOL! (http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=3163)

AMD invest in Intel accuser (http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2005/02/24/amd_patriot_investment/)

So after following this mess for so many years, I'm NOT shocked AMD is doing this.

[socrilles]

I enjoy my cheap Dell systems and all, but intel is clearly doing some illegal stuff.

Basically they are undercutting AMD by making sure manufacturers use 100% intel. This is done by evaluating the demand the manufacturers have and then ensuring that they only get an extra discount if they sell that amount of intel computers. If they wanted to do 90/10 80/20 etc, it would hurt them tremendously because they wouldnt get the same discounted price on the 90% or 80% of the processors, and therefore have to do 100J% intel. The funny thing I think though is hearing all the AMD zealots shout about how great this is, this is just going to make the price of AMD processors go up as there will now be a greater demand for the chips

[rozzyroz]

i personally think this is just an advertising stunt.... if computer manufacturers decide to go with all intel chips, they get a discount.... wich means because they are running a higher volume of chips, they get a better deal on them.... if they choose not to run all intel chips, they dont get as good of a deal... as they wont be running that volume.

i just dont see how it's intels fault that amd cant be competitive with prices. even if they could be competitive, could they supply chips the way intel does? pc manufacturers see that and it makes the decision easy for them...

dont gte me wrong, amd makes a good chip.... they just cant price for high volume sales. the people that are buying the dells and such arent buying them to game on...they are looking for a cheap and capable computer... in this area, intel is a really good choice.

please dont label ma as a fanboy or something here.. im just calling it as i see it. :toast:

[SlimySquid]

while I agree Intel has played dirty pool for the most part, AMD should be happy they did to some extent, AMD doesn't have enough fab space to supply enough chips at it's current market share, much less throwing another 20% at them, there would be such a shortage of AMD chips. it would end up being just as bad as intel now, AMD would sell there chips to dell, gateway,compaq, and HP before Newegg and zzf, which means the only way ya get one is buy a craptastic dell or something.
:confused:

[TodB]

its about time AMD stood up for themself, and stopped taking it all, and just ignoring it.

everyone knows intel is a monopoly, mainly due to dells backing.
about time AMD spoke up about it.

:up: