25 watts is the good old days now - Bob Colwell, former Intel chief architect
|
|
|
US FTC smacks down Intel
A REQUEST by Intel to bar a commissioner from sitting in an antitrust enforcement action against it has been smacked down by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
According Bloomberg, Intel claimed there was a conflict of interest in the case of Commissioner J Thomas Rosch, who was employed as an antitrust lawyer by Intel between 1987 and 1993.
However, the FTC rejected Intel’s motion in its response (PDF).
Chipzilla said that Rosch, who has been an FTC commissioner since 2006, had advised Intel on a range of antitrust issues.
If Intel loses the antitrust case, which is currently being reviewed by an FTC administrative law judge, it will have to take the matter to the US Court of Appeals.
The FTC has an extensive file on Intel. µ
Share this:
Share
Do you agree Intel must subsidize its competitor, AMD? Well, at least Dirk Meyer had been employed at Intel.
I hope that Intel will crush the rats in ARM based architecture vendors. I don't want to see them, because I want everyone to be implanted with Intel's chips and become smarter to choose Intel Inside as Intel can control what people will think.
no, you educate yourself.
What "legal rulings" are you talking about?
There was no legal ruling in the EU, according to the EC. If you remember, they claim that their findings are "not a legal matter" but an "administrative decision" in their explanation as to why Intel doesn't have the right to have the case heard in a court, and why they should be able to not meet standards of evidence.
There has been no "legal ruling" from the FTC either; they don't get to do that, it has to go to a court.
In fact, none of this has ever made it in front of a court, anywhere in the world, and so far we haven't seen anything that is required to pass standards of evidence in any jurisdiction.
Hector, please see the FTC rulings and EU rulings and the AMD settlement rulings on Intel's convictions for multiple violations of anti-trust laws over the past 15 years. If you don't have a clue, maybe you can get a monkey to explain the legal decisions to you.
"they will continue to violate anti-trust laws"
Remind me again how they're violating anti-trust laws ? It can't be because they have a process lead of at a least a year and have produced the best processors for most of the 40 years since they invented the microprocessor. It's called competition and if any competitor falls behind just a bit, it's really hard to catch up.
Until Intel gets nailed with a $500 Billion - that's with a "B" fine, they will continue to violate anti-trust laws for profit. Why wouldn't they when they make huge profits from violation of law?
I just hope they look a the BILLIONS of dollars our economy lost when E6300 dropped the bottom out while Q6600 made sure it would stay out.
Market leaders can't manipulate prices so the smaller competition can't afford it.
Isn't that a Standard Oil tactic?
Well, I guess that's what happens when you can't play fair with others from day one!