EU likely to fine Intel for anti-competitive behavior

[NJ5]

heruamon said:

NJ5 said:
Here is one more little piece of anti-competitive Intel behavior. The Intel-Skype deal, where Skype locked in some features of its application to PCs with Intel CPUs.

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/mar2006/gb20060301_227521.htm

Not a big deal compared to these "bribes", but still indicates that Intel has no problems with engaging in these deals, even openly.

PS: I don't hate Intel, in fact I have only ever bought one CPU from AMD in more than 15 years of using PCs. That doesn't mean I'm blind to Intel's behaviors though.

So, is EU going to SUE M$ over the exclusive DLC for GTA nad other games? Is the EU goign t o fine the US for having a Most Favored Nation status for some countries? If they want to say that EU citizens were prevented from buying AMD based computers, and they have evidence of the lack of THAT option, I can agree with it, but to say cutting sweet deals with manufacturers to use their chips is riddiculous. So...are they going to sue Apple for squahing others from making computers, other than Apple built computers from running OS X? WTF...

Your comparisons are not relevant for this case.

If you have followed Microsoft's antitrust cases at all, you must know that the rules are applied differently to companies which have a monopoly in a particular market. Some deals which would be fine for your random small company are frowned upon when performed by companies which do those deals to squash the competition. Microsoft doesn't have a monopoly in the gaming market, Apple doesn't have a monopoly in computers or operating systems, so they have more freedom to do those deals.

This is of course because when a company gets big enough, it has the resources to drive competitors out of the market simply by cutting prices and losing money while the competitor goes bankrupt. Then they drive prices back up, and customer lock-in ensures that they get back to making profits, perpetuating a monoply. This is why artificial rules have to be introduced to maintain the choice given by the free markets. There's no free market without regulation, due to this reason.