What the Intel / AMD Settlement Doesn't Mean

By Larry Downes on November 13, 2009 at 2:05 pm

Intel and AMD announced today that they were settling their many antitrust and patent disputes, with Intel to pay $1.25 billion and the two companies to cross-license the affected patents. Intel also agreed to “a set of undisclosed new business practrices,” as The New York Times puts it.

Let’s be clear what this agreement doesn’t do. It doesn’t erase the pending antitrust actions taken by the European Union and elsewhere against Intel, or the recently filed antitrust lawsuit filed in federal court in the U.S. by New York attorney-general Andrew Cuomo. (Recall that in May the EU fined Intel $1.45 billion, a judgment the company is appealing.)

The announced settlement of the private litigation, indeed, will have no effect on the EU case, at least according to EU antitrust commissioner Neelie Kroes.

I will make a bold prediction, however, that over the next twelve months both the EU and New York State antitrust enforcement actions will quietly disappear. Intel will not pay $1.45 billion to the Europeans, or face the wrath of Andrew Cuomo who, after 23 months of investigation, has found evidence that he claims proves Intel has bribed and blackmailed its major customers.

For more, see http://larrydownes.com/the-intelamd-settlement-watch-what-happens/

Comments

Jamie cullins November 23, 2009 at 8:02 am

Yes, Intel does have a number of lawsuits going on but these seems to rarely get talked about. I think in this kind of multibillion dollar environment it's not unusual for companies to treat court as their home
http://www.homegardenwarehouse.net/

Jeffrey Wright November 16, 2009 at 12:14 pm

It is often overlooked that while Intel Corporation is the subject of many, many lawsuits, not only the area of antitrust but also patent and others, it is equally aggressive in pursuing its own litigation. It has repeatedly sued companies not even remotely involved in the chip-making business for the use of the word 'intel' in their names or domains. It has even asserts its ownership of this common-use public-domain English language short-term word for intelligence when it is being used in its generic, descriptive sense of "information gathering and analysis." On Friday the 13th we became the unlucky targets of such a suit. See: http://www.intelfortheintelligent.com/.

Mike Bruzzone November 14, 2009 at 10:17 am

What the Intel AMD settlement does not mean is that Intel shares will be reissued as AMD shares anytime soon.
AMD gets its Clayton Act & RICO concessions resulting from a history of Intel Network Sales abuses and channel frauds.
Intel weasels its way out of a mutually sticky situation for their court costs.
AMD saves court costs in the short run, some of the sticky, and Intel take over in the long run.
While the settlement enables both enterprises to focus on product design/manufacturing and revenue generation for them selves and compliments, to loose any first party leadership in this manner promotes a sense of abandonment.
Mike Bruzzone
Camp Marketing

Andrew Jacob November 13, 2009 at 3:20 pm

In a world of micro tehnology where there are just two players is hard not to form a trust when the stake is a billion dollar market. I remember the only company that wanted to put them in difficulty was Via but it lost the battle before it began. They are much to powerfull and strong to be dealt with and Intel is the one that puts the stakes on the table, AMD is just a follower. Just look at all the the companies that use only Intel, why is that? when there are cheapper chips like AMD especially in economical crissis momments when all the companies want to reduce costs.
Trust situation is unavoidable.

Add new comment