- Saturday, 11 July 2009
- INQ Mobile
- RSS
Sweet is war to those who have never experienced it - Latin proverb
Intel misses EU antitrust case deadline
INTEL IS IN trouble with the European Union Competition Commission (EUCC) after missing a deadline for filing requested legal paperwork in an antitrust case involving European PC sellers.
Chipzilla missed the October 17th deadline, claiming it was holding out to hear the results of an appeal asking the Commission for more time to respond to the charges against the firm.
The EUCC, Europe’s main antitrust body, has charged Intel with trying to damage rival AMD’s chip sales on the continent by giving unfair discounts to retailers if they sell Intel products.
The excuse is all a bit “the-dog-ate-my-homework”, but Intel Spinner Chuck Mulloy argued his firm was just trying to come up with more evidence to give the Commission for the proceeding.
"This is fundamentally a fairness issue; we simply want to be able to conduct a fair defence," Mulloy told Reuters.
The EUCC first issued charges against Chipzilla back in July and it took the firm until October to file an appeal claiming they had not had sufficient time to build a proper defence.
Shurely it doesn’t take three months to come up with the truth, though? µ
Share this:
Business Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management
Considering the sheer number of times Intel has lied, coming up with the truth is a complicated and delicate process. It’s not something you can just rush out the door.
...but they have none so they are trying to do a paper shufffle to fool the EU. With any luck intel will get a 500 Billion Euro fine and have all sales of Intel products frozen until they pay the fine and change their illegal operating practices.
I'm not sure I'm convinced there is a "sheer number of times Intel has lied" nor that we should presume there is any guilt to be had. I can't say I have seen the evidence that there was any harm to the consumer, which we certainly should have seen if there was true abuse of monopoly. 

Alex, what evidence are you referring to? 

Paul, surely you are kidding? You would rather see Intel suffer while having to pay an arm and a leg to buy one of the scarce functioning AMD Tripods.
So.... what now? A million dollar a day fine? Or another sternly worded letter?
@Paul: yes, and then you can live with one of AMD's slower-than-celeron quads. treat for the gamers.
For all the EU knows Intel could be trying to destroy evidence of any illegal activities they may have conducted. Assuming their guilty like Microsoft was once charged with deleting emails that were part of the proof being used by the plaintiffs in the Microsoft antitrust case Intel could be trying to destroy proof of their own guilt.