RSSEC Charges Intel with Abuse of Dominant Power
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published July 27, 2007, 10:54 AM
(continued from previous page)
This morning, Intel issued a statement from its senior vice president and general counsel, Bruce Sewell: "We are confident that the microprocessor market segment is functioning normally and that Intel's conduct has been lawful, pro-competitive, and beneficial to consumers," Sewell writes. "While we would certainly have preferred to avoid the cost and inconvenience of establishing that our competitive conduct in Europe has been lawful, the Commission's decision to issue a Statement of Objections means that at last Intel will have the opportunity to hear and respond to the allegations made by our primary competitor."
Sewell goes on to make a sort of counter-allegation: that the EC's case is being catalyzed not by the European microprocessor market, but by AMD.
"The case is based on complaints from a direct competitor rather than customers or consumers," he writes. "The Commission has an obligation to investigate those complaints. However, a Statement of Objections contains only preliminary allegations and does not itself amount to a finding that there has been a violation of European Union law. Intel will now be given the chance to respond directly to the Commission's concerns as part of the administrative process.
"The evidence that this industry is fiercely competitive and working is compelling," Sewell concludes. "When competitors perform and execute the market rewards them. When they falter and under-perform the market responds accordingly."
BetaNews asked Intel spokesperson Chuck Mulloy this morning to address, as best he could, the specific allegations raised by the EC Statement.
While he was not in a position to reveal much of the Statement's confidential information, "I can say that we expect to demonstrate to the Commission that rebates and other forms of discounting are not illegal," Mulloy told BetaNews, "and that they had nothing to do with AMD's performance in the market as a company. As we've said many times, AMD's performance has been the result of their business decisions and their ability to execute. We believe their current position in the market demonstrates that.
"After six years of investigation, we have a clear picture of what concerns the EC," Mulloy continued, "and we will now work to respond to their concerns. In our view, the information they have on costs may not be complete or could be inaccurate. We will work to correct that."
For its part this morning, AMD's executive vice president for legal affairs, Thomas McCoy, issued this statement: "Consumers know today that their welfare has been sacrificed in the illegal interest of preserving monopoly profits. Intel has circled the globe with a pattern of conduct, including direct payments, in order to enforce full and partial boycotts of AMD. The EU action obviously suggests that Intel has, once again, been unable to justify its illegal conduct."
Upon seeing AMD's press release this morning, Intel's Mulloy followed up with BetaNews by saying it omits important information supplied by the EC, and that it may be in error by characterizing the Statement's charges against Intel as a "preliminary conclusion that Intel has engaged in three types of abuse in a dominant market position."
Look, Intel got to the top by using marketing techniques and being there earlier.
AMD just needs to pack it in; Intel's marketing techniques sound completely legal to me, and are done by many other companies.
Score: 0
|"...spokespersons for the European Commission confirmed that Intel was served..."
There you have it. Intel was served :P
Score: 0
|You know what? Survival of the fittest. But still, F*CK Intel. Hope to see AMD make a devastatingly BRUTAL surprise comeback in the microprocessor arena that puts a massive dildo up Intels monopolizing, competition-stifling butt hole.
Score: 0
|Sounds like you might have an anger management problem there.
Score: 0
|Nice use of formatting, Scott
Score: 0
|Score: 0
|Score: 0
|I think this is a moot point. The EU is done for anyway - with a negative birthrate (meaning more people are dying than being born) - unless it changes soon, there won't be an EU anyway.
Score: 0
|Hello Mr Bush.
Score: 0
|Must EVERYTHING be a !@#$ing political debate?
Live a little, and for heaven's sake quit listening to every blog/news editor you hear.
Bush has no authority other than specific excecutive powers that are not approved or proposed by the other branches of government. He CAN'T write law, change law, or even propose law. That's the Senate/House people speaking to him and he presents their plan to us. He's a spokesman more than a policy maker.
Nevermind--I forgot that government classes post 9/11 don't always teach real government anymore.
Score: 0
|"I think this is a moot point. The EU is done for anyway"
That's funny, because the last time I checked the Euro was considerably stronger than the American dollar. Soon the American dollar will be weaker than the Canadian dollar. Seems to me like it's the American dollar and economy that's going down the drain, not the EU. Also, look out! There's a terrorist behind you! hahaha
Score: 0
|Well said. The sheep get old.
Score: 0
|Soon being how long? 500 years?
Of course, nothing ever changes - now the birthrate is falling it can't ever reverse.
(sarcasm)
Score: 0
|What are you trying to demostrate? in the EU is the same count of attacks by terrorists than in the USA. This have something to be with very very dirty politics than technology comments posted here.
The Euro is getting bigger than the dolar, this is a fact. Something is going to do USA to stop this soon, the one´s that will need to be at watch sould be the EU citizens :P
Score: 0
|Actually, the Executive branch *does* have the power to propose laws to Congress during his State of the Union and other addresses to Congress. Proposing is not the same as signing laws into existence.
Any citizen can *PROPOSE* a law to Congress, although it's usually never done because people are supposed to go through their representative/senator.
The Executive branch *can* veto a law or even let it die in special circumstances if not signed within 10 days of passing and being given to the President, but Congress adjourns during that period, which is de-facto lawmaking in reverse(or in this case, law "revocation" by the President).
The Executive branch also is in charge of FORIEGN POLICY, so yes, they DO make policies and lest we forget about Executive Orders, which are just as binding as a law to any federal agency, especially if it's within the scope of powers given to the President by the Constitution or Congress.
Some of you need to go back to school. The President has a LOT of power.
Score: 0
|I'm British and even I know that you're wrong.
Executive orders: http://tinyurl.com/2blww4
Signing statements: http://tinyurl.com/28f7hl
Score: 0
|Don't listen to what your pastor tells you, dumba**. The EU is in a much better financial state than the US.
Noticed how the US dollar is about to become less valuable than the Canadian dollar? Be embarrassed. No more "lol one US dollar is 300 Canadian dollar" jokes for you, cretin.
Score: 0
|Considering world population is too high, (albeit in China, Africa, and India,) why is this a bad thing?
If the world was held steady at 1 billion instead of 6+, wouldn't that theoretically mean better quality of living for everyone?
Score: 0
|What he tries to say is simple... In the US the state is trying to scare people off with terorism continously. This is not the case in Europe. The leaders here do not link every problem that Europe is going through with terorism.
Score: 0
|As Commander in Cheif, yes, he is in charge of foreign policy. Yes, he's the one who ultimately lead America to go to war in Iraq. Yes, that's a big power.
However, there are no proposals that are given directly to the House/Senate until someone in the House or Senate actually proposes it. Yes, Bush can ask Lamar Smith to propose a bill, but ultimately, Bush cannot propose it--Lamar would have to (or another member of the House).
My point is that Bush could do little if anything if he were alone--there are still people in the House/Senate that support him, because without any support, he couldn't do anything. No, Lamar isn't the only one, just an example.
State of the Union? Hmm...yes, I suppose he can propose things there. I'll give you that one--I seem to forget about all those 'exceptions' to general rules. Too many of em to count (although the state of the union was a stupid one for me to overlook, sorry). Anyway, Has Bush ever proposed something that he couldn't get ANY backing for? Hardley. He's never alone with his policies is all I'm saying.
Yes, the power of veto can be strong, but it still can be overriden by 2/3rd majority. Apparently, 1/3rd of the Senate still sides with him in most cases. That's at least 33 Senators, in case anyone wasn't counting. Without 33 Senators--Bush'd be powerless.
"Some of you need to go back to school. The President has a LOT of power."
All I'm saying is that in and of itself, holding the office of President is not as strong as one would think compared to, say, the Prime Minister in Britian, the Emporer in China, etc.
Score: 0
|No reason for me to even look at those links. I'll read it at .gov sites when I'm confused, not some third party.
When in doubt, check closest to the source, not a rephrase of a rephrase of an opinion of a rephrase of the source. The url's you provided certainly aren't government websites is all I'm saying.
Score: 0
|Western Europe has a negative birthrate but Eastern Europe does not. Since Eastern Europe is now a part of the EU, the EU is not literally dying off yet. Additionally, the EU countries import a lot of labor from nearby 3rd world countries much like the US does from Mexico. The EU immigrants tend to be Muslim though and are steeped in an anti-Western terrorist tradition thus the immigrant issue is big in both the EU and US (and for similar reasons).
Score: 0
|"What are you trying to demonstrate? in the EU is the same count of attacks by terrorists than in the USA. This have something to be with very very dirty politics"
The dirty politics is the corrupt and mediaeval state of affairs not in Europe or the US but the Middle Ages in the Middle East. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a poster child for such Dark Ages corruption.
Score: 0
|"We expect to demonstrate to the Commission that rebates and other forms of discounting are not illegal, and they had nothing to do with AMD's performance in the market as a company."
Based on the EU's track record with Microsoft, all I can say to Intel is: good luck with that!
To be honest I'm not entirely sure if Intel is behaving illegally or not, but I have heard many rumors that they have gone to incredible lengths at some points in the past to prevent AMD from having their chips in OEM's PCs. Whether those rumors are true or not I cannot say for sure, but Intel has been very "suspicious" in the past, and the destroying of all those documents recently is more than enough to warrant an investigation at least.
If Intel's innocent, I hope they win, but welcome them to the wondeful world of being too good, Intel. Microsoft will no longer alone...
...Otherwise, Intel did something far more harmful to consumers than anything Microsoft has done, IMHO anyway.
Score: 0
|Well yeah...We all knew Intel was doing it. It was only a little obvious...
Score: 0
|But it fell on deaf ears ... For years its been know Intel have been doing it. Even when AMD was producing better 486's than Intel, producing faster and cooler chips. Recently even when AMD was whooping them performance wise intel still had a strong base, company s tied to them with back room deals. Still ... The EU is here to settle the score, and take our cut. And it helps AMD ... perfect.
Score: 0
|All monopolies need to be broken down. Being in Saskatchewan, land of monopolies, I get to see the joyous benefits of industry with an assured audience daily. Great for the shareholders and politicians campaign coffers for sure but its too bad the middle class don't have enough income left over or the connections to join in on any of that fun.
Same thing with the PC. When the dust settles and there's 1.1 choices to be had, who do you think is going to not be able to afford the ever changing tech to keep up? Or for that matter, why would it ever even need to change. Like Microsoft did with VISTA, Intel could one day just tell us "This is good enough for you. Now eat up."
Score: 0
|