Cannot include the effects on small businesses
Legal manoeuvrings from Chipzilla briefs have seen off an attempt by New York's attorney general to amend an antitrust lawsuit against Intel.
New York lawyers claimed in 2009 that Chipzilla had paid billions of dollars in kickbacks to computer manufacturers in order to dominate the market for computer microprocessors. It had also retaliated against those who did business with its competitors.
However since then, New York has decided that its beef with Intel is much bigger than it first thought. Its briefs wanted to amend the complaint to clarify that what it said were state law claims made on behalf of all consumers, including small and medium businesses.
Chipzilla, naturally was up in arms about the change. It argued that no one had mentioned small businesses and consumers before and that would set all its preparation for trial out of wack. If New York insisted on widening the case, then it would have to look at its notes, ruminate a bit, consider all its options, talk with its people, ride the odd glacier, and then perhaps it would be ready for trial.
But in a ruling, the judge decided that if he was going to get the case to trial before he collected his pension, or at least before he had to hand over the case to his grandchildren, that it was silly to let New York widen the case. Besides if New York can make its case on those charges, it can make it anywhere, particularly if the city never sleeps.