Featured Articles

Nvidia Shield 2 shows up in AnTuTu

Nvidia Shield 2 shows up in AnTuTu

Nvidia’s original Shield console launched last summer to mixed reviews. It went on sale in the US and so far Nvidia…

More...
AMD CSO John Byrne talks ARM

AMD CSO John Byrne talks ARM

We had a chance to talk about AMD’s upcoming products with John Byrne, Chief Sales Officer, AMD. We covered a number…

More...
AMD Chief Sales Officer thinks GPU leadership is critical

AMD Chief Sales Officer thinks GPU leadership is critical

We had a chance to talk to John Byrne who spent the last two years as Senior Vice President and Chief…

More...
OpenPlus One $299 5.5-inch Full HD phone

OpenPlus One $299 5.5-inch Full HD phone

OnePlus is one of the few small companies that might disrupt the Android phone market, dominated by giant outfits like Samsung.…

More...
KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Tuesday, 27 December 2011 11:47

Intel Anti-Trust case goes to New York

Written by Nick Farell



If it can make it there it can make it anywhere


A federal judge in Delaware has cancelled a February 14 trial of an antitrust case filed against Intel.

New York state asked the court to allow its transfer to a New York state court because it can't  proceed in the court with its claim for damages under its state's laws. Judge Stark had on December 7 granted Intel's motion that some of the claims of New York state fell outside the statute of limitations, which is three years in antitrust cases in Delaware as compared to up to six years in New York state. The judge also disallowed a treble damages claim by New York on behalf of consumers under New York's Donnelly Act.

Intel had contended that the Donnelly Act does not authorise New York to bring a damages claim for harm done to private parties. New York will file in New York state court to seek whatever remedies are available to it there, Schneiderman said. New York claimed charged Intel with a systematic worldwide campaign of "illegal, exclusionary conduct" to maintain its monopoly power and prices in the market for x86 processors.

Nick Farell

E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
+2 #1 saneblane 2011-12-27 16:26
Score 1, for the little guys.They make good processors now, but what they did was slow the entire industry down, we might have long passed this level of performance if Amd was given a fair playing field back in the day.New york,I want you to fcuk Intel up,it's been a long time coming.
 
 
+3 #2 Bl0bb3r 2011-12-27 17:15
Think they'll top the 1 billion figure? More precisely 1,3 billion USD, if the EU exchange rate doesn't slip some more.
 
 
+2 #3 redisnidma 2011-12-27 17:43
IMHO about this particular case, Intel had a lot more to loose than the 1.2 billion they settled with AMD.
I could bet you any day that if found guilty (which they are), they would be forced to pay a fine of 8 to 12 billion dollars (more or less).

Anyhow, AMD settling things up with intel means that they're free of any charge, right?? :roll:
 
 
+4 #4 pogsnet 2011-12-27 17:45
Ah US is late and I think they wont rule it out. EU, Japan, and South Korea already found Intel guilty but in US...hmmm maybe we will wait 32 cores or more to come out in consumer market but still no ruling.

In more accurate logic, they don't hurt AMD much but rather the consumer. It is like buying substandard housing at premium price.
 
 
+2 #5 nECrO 2011-12-27 18:37
Quoting pogsnet:
Ah US is late and I think they wont rule it out. EU, Japan, and South Korea already found Intel guilty but in US...hmmm maybe we will wait 32 cores or more to come out in consumer market but still no ruling.

In more accurate logic, they don't hurt AMD much but rather the consumer. It is like buying substandard housing at premium price.




While I agree with most of your comment, I will disagree with the statement that Intel didn't hurt AMD much. In reality, they damn near castrated them and in doing so screwed consumers world wide. Who can say what Bulldozer might have been if Intel hadn't played dirty and robbed AMD of billions in R&D money....
 
 
+1 #6 fteoath64 2011-12-28 08:00
Quoting nECrO:
Who can say what Bulldozer might have been if Intel hadn't played dirty and robbed AMD of billions in R&D money....


Well, BullDozer might have been a 12 core chip with 12MB sec cache, 64MB L3 cache performing 2.5 times i7 at the same price. Then Intel would have to sell i7 at $99 instead of their current price levels.
 
 
+2 #7 Super XP 2011-12-28 08:45
Hope Intel gets nailed in the pocket book in Billions upon Billions. Maybe then they will learn a hard lesson and finally play nice.

Bulldozer was the fault of AMD's management pulling out much needed R&D. Reason why they pulled money from there is due to Intel screwing AMD in securing good contracts? Perhaps? Who Knows?
 
 
0 #8 redisnidma 2011-12-28 17:24
Quoting Super XP:
Hope Intel gets nailed in the pocket book in Billions upon Billions. Maybe then they will learn a hard lesson and finally play nice.

Bulldozer was the fault of AMD's management pulling out much needed R&D. Reason why they pulled money from there is due to Intel screwing AMD in securing good contracts? Perhaps? Who Knows?


I doubt that's the case. Remember one thing: AMD have being developing Bulldozer for almost 7 years now. There's simply no excuse for such low performance.
 
 
+1 #9 123s 2011-12-28 18:46
Hope they gotta pay more than the change money they had to pay before. 8 to 12 billions sounds pretty nice.
 
 
0 #10 nECrO 2011-12-29 07:24
Quoting redisnidma:
I doubt that's the case. Remember one thing: AMD have being developing Bulldozer for almost 7 years now. There's simply no excuse for such low performance.





Exactly. And Intel has been up to it's tricks longer than that. They also pulled out all the stops and in some cases sold at a loss when AMD was the most dominant and was in a position to take a huge amount of market share if not for Intel's Illegal actions.
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments