heruamon said: Right..it's fines, to support the EU's ability to fine more companies that succeed. I'll tell you this, I can't see the US Gov't letting this go unchecked. This fine is excessive, to say the least, and with a fine this harsh, it's going to spin into politics quickly. The case here, imho, is to prove how EU consumers were harmed, not to protect a US company from another US company for the sake of competition. I jsut don't see this fine standing up to the withering attack it is going to receive from most US business and the pressure that will be applied to get this overturned. Bottomline will be this...if htey can do this to Intthey can do this others...Apple and Itunes is so going to be in the crosshairs...btw...are they going to force Apple to use AMD chips in their systems?

You're making it look like this will turn into an international diplomatic disaster. Maybe World War 3 even?

Your posts are becoming thread spam. You keep repeating the same thing, not yet having explained why this case is such a big deal when similar ones (especially Microsoft's) haven't caused any trouble before. Not just that but USA's regulators are saying they'll get harder on companies, opening the possibility Intel gets fined again.

 

More details:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/EU-fines-Intel-145-billion-apf-15228311.html?sec=topStories&pos=1&asset=&ccode=

 

NJ5 said: heruamon said: Right..it's fines, to support the EU's ability to fine more companies that succeed. I'll tell you this, I can't see the US Gov't letting this go unchecked. This fine is excessive, to say the least, and with a fine this harsh, it's going to spin into politics quickly. The case here, imho, is to prove how EU consumers were harmed, not to protect a US company from another US company for the sake of competition. I jsut don't see this fine standing up to the withering attack it is going to receive from most US business and the pressure that will be applied to get this overturned. Bottomline will be this...if htey can do this to Intthey can do this others...Apple and Itunes is so going to be in the crosshairs...btw...are they going to force Apple to use AMD chips in their systems?   You're making it look like this will turn into an international diplomatic disaster. Maybe World War 3 even? Your posts are becoming thread spam. You keep repeating the same thing, not yet having explained why this case is such a big deal when similar ones (especially Microsoft's) haven't caused any trouble before. Not just that but USA's regulators are saying they'll get harder on companies, opening the possibility Intel gets fined again.

First off, this isn't like the California vs. M$ case, and I pointed out the key differences, even if you don't understand or agree with them. Second, this isn't going to turn into WWIII, but I'll be surprised with the US Gov't doesn't get involved, because this is a foreign government regulating two US companies against each other. It's about precedence, and that makes it a big deal...don't believe me, turn on your TV now, and check out Bloomberg, or CNBC, or whatever...it's HUGE news. Third, I don't see the substance of the case against Intel...and how this applies to EU consumers. Exactly what laws were broken in the EU...since Intel giving nice deals to Dell...two US companies, btw, doesn't really fall under EU purview, imho. Now, the Electronics retailer might be a example, but they would need clear proof of direct Intel tampering, not innuendos. BTW, can you provide some concrete data to show how US regulators are cracking down on a company making harder for a rival to compete, in this manner?

NJ5 said: heruamon said: Right..it's fines, to support the EU's ability to fine more companies that succeed. I'll tell you this, I can't see the US Gov't letting this go unchecked. This fine is excessive, to say the least, and with a fine this harsh, it's going to spin into politics quickly. The case here, imho, is to prove how EU consumers were harmed, not to protect a US company from another US company for the sake of competition. I jsut don't see this fine standing up to the withering attack it is going to receive from most US business and the pressure that will be applied to get this overturned. Bottomline will be this...if htey can do this to Intthey can do this others...Apple and Itunes is so going to be in the crosshairs...btw...are they going to force Apple to use AMD chips in their systems?   You're making it look like this will turn into an international diplomatic disaster. Maybe World War 3 even? Your posts are becoming thread spam. You keep repeating the same thing, not yet having explained why this case is such a big deal when similar ones (especially Microsoft's) haven't caused any trouble before. Not just that but USA's regulators are saying they'll get harder on companies, opening the possibility Intel gets fined again.

 

NJ5, I admire your patience, I really do.

I'd just like to point out how your answers are detailed and researched even when answering the most unfounded womenly-emotive accusations.

Frankly, i'm exhausted just by reading your efforts against the endless tides of stupity available. God I need a beer...

heruamon said: NJ5 said: heruamon said: Right..it's fines, to support the EU's ability to fine more companies that succeed. I'll tell you this, I can't see the US Gov't letting this go unchecked. This fine is excessive, to say the least, and with a fine this harsh, it's going to spin into politics quickly. The case here, imho, is to prove how EU consumers were harmed, not to protect a US company from another US company for the sake of competition. I jsut don't see this fine standing up to the withering attack it is going to receive from most US business and the pressure that will be applied to get this overturned. Bottomline will be this...if htey can do this to Intthey can do this others...Apple and Itunes is so going to be in the crosshairs...btw...are they going to force Apple to use AMD chips in their systems?   You're making it look like this will turn into an international diplomatic disaster. Maybe World War 3 even? Your posts are becoming thread spam. You keep repeating the same thing, not yet having explained why this case is such a big deal when similar ones (especially Microsoft's) haven't caused any trouble before. Not just that but USA's regulators are saying they'll get harder on companies, opening the possibility Intel gets fined again.     First off, this isn't like the California vs. M$ case, and I pointed out the key differences, even if you don't understand or agree with them. Second, this isn't going to turn into WWIII, but I'll be surprised with the US Gov't doesn't get involved, because this is a foreign government regulating two US companies against each other. It's about precedence, and that makes it a big deal...don't believe me, turn on your TV now, and check out Bloomberg, or CNBC, or whatever...it's HUGE news. Third, I don't see the substance of the case against Intel...and how this applies to EU consumers. Exactly what laws were broken in the EU...since Intel giving nice deals to Dell...two US companies, btw, doesn't really fall under EU purview, imho. Now, the Electronics retailer might be a example, but they would need clear proof of direct Intel tampering, not innuendos. BTW, can you provide some concrete data to show how US regulators are cracking down on a company making harder for a rival to compete, in this manner?

I will reply to your points in order:

I was not talking about the California vs MS case. I was talking about the EU vs MS case, where MS was fined by hundreds of millions of dollars (i.e. about half of Intel's fine).

It's big news in business terms, not politically.

It applies to EU consumers since these violations happened in the EU market, with Intel restricting the availability of AMD products. See the post above yours, which has some more details from a new article. Apparently hard proof was found during raids at the companies in question.

Several articles have mentioned USA regulators becoming more active, for example:

(from the last article) And the U.S. may be stepping up action. The Federal Trade Commission upgraded a probe into Intel last year -- and as the Obama administration is set to take a more aggressive approach against monopoly abuse by reversing a strict interpretation of antitrust law that saw regulators shun such cases.

(from the BBC article) "Despite its strong defence, Intel is facing a wall of regulatory resistance to its business practices around the world, with antitrust infringement decisions against it now in Japan, Korea, and the EU, while the US authorities are investigating Intel as well," said David Anderson, a lawyer at Berwin Leighton Paisner.

 

NJ5 said: heruamon said: NJ5 said: heruamon said: Right..it's fines, to support the EU's ability to fine more companies that succeed. I'll tell you this, I can't see the US Gov't letting this go unchecked. This fine is excessive, to say the least, and with a fine this harsh, it's going to spin into politics quickly. The case here, imho, is to prove how EU consumers were harmed, not to protect a US company from another US company for the sake of competition. I jsut don't see this fine standing up to the withering attack it is going to receive from most US business and the pressure that will be applied to get this overturned. Bottomline will be this...if htey can do this to Intthey can do this others...Apple and Itunes is so going to be in the crosshairs...btw...are they going to force Apple to use AMD chips in their systems?   You're making it look like this will turn into an international diplomatic disaster. Maybe World War 3 even? Your posts are becoming thread spam. You keep repeating the same thing, not yet having explained why this case is such a big deal when similar ones (especially Microsoft's) haven't caused any trouble before. Not just that but USA's regulators are saying they'll get harder on companies, opening the possibility Intel gets fined again.     First off, this isn't like the California vs. M$ case, and I pointed out the key differences, even if you don't understand or agree with them. Second, this isn't going to turn into WWIII, but I'll be surprised with the US Gov't doesn't get involved, because this is a foreign government regulating two US companies against each other. It's about precedence, and that makes it a big deal...don't believe me, turn on your TV now, and check out Bloomberg, or CNBC, or whatever...it's HUGE news. Third, I don't see the substance of the case against Intel...and how this applies to EU consumers. Exactly what laws were broken in the EU...since Intel giving nice deals to Dell...two US companies, btw, doesn't really fall under EU purview, imho. Now, the Electronics retailer might be a example, but they would need clear proof of direct Intel tampering, not innuendos. BTW, can you provide some concrete data to show how US regulators are cracking down on a company making harder for a rival to compete, in this manner? I will reply to your points in order: I was not talking about the California vs MS case. I was talking about the EU vs MS case, where MS was fined by hundreds of millions of dollars (i.e. about half of Intel's fine). It's big news in business terms, not politically. It applies to EU consumers since these violations happened in the EU market, with Intel restricting the availability of AMD products. See the post above yours, which has some more details from a new article. Apparently hard proof was found during raids at the companies in question. Several articles have mentioned USA regulators becoming more active, for example: (from the last article) And the U.S. may be stepping up action. The Federal Trade Commission upgraded a probe into Intel last year -- and as the Obama administration is set to take a more aggressive approach against monopoly abuse by reversing a strict interpretation of antitrust law that saw regulators shun such cases. (from the BBC article) "Despite its strong defence, Intel is facing a wall of regulatory resistance to its business practices around the world, with antitrust infringement decisions against it now in Japan, Korea, and the EU, while the US authorities are investigating Intel as well," said David Anderson, a lawyer at Berwin Leighton Paisner.

You might be right, and Intel'sdays are numbered...btw...has M$ paid their fine yet?

Gh0st4lifE said:   NJ5, I admire your patience, I really do. I'd just like to point out how your answers are detailed and researched even when answering the most unfounded womenly-emotive accusations. Frankly, i'm exhausted just by reading your efforts against the endless tides of stupity available. God I need a beer...

Thanks :) My point with debating these things is to learn more myself, and inform others when possible. Clearly that's not going to happen by just posting opinative stuff. In other words, if I'm going to "waste time" discussing things at Internet forums, I might as well try to make it worth something.

I have an endless supply of beer to help :P

 

heruamon said:   You might be right, and Intel'sdays are numbered...btw...has M$ paid their fine yet?

Intel will be fine, these fines are nowhere near enough to bankrupt them.

I think after a few years MS stopped appealing the fine, so they may have paid it already:

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2007/10/22/microsoft_europe_agreement/

 

NJ5 said: heruamon said:   You might be right, and Intel'sdays are numbered...btw...has M$ paid their fine yet? Intel will be fine, these fines are nowhere near enough to bankrupt them. I think after a few years MS stopped appealing the fine, so they may have paid it already: http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2007/10/22/microsoft_europe_agreement/

M$ has not paid the latest fine...yet...but With M$, Intl and Apple all in the sights of EU regulators...I see a bit of a trend...if you execute well, you become a target of EU regulators. They are now investigating Internet Explorer, because it comes with Windows...and that's not fair to competition...how freaking lame is that...seems like EU is using these US tech gaints as a nice little piggy bank to slap an extra tax on them. I'm sure Billions of $$$ in fines can go a long way to paying the bills for the EU...while protecting those vunerable EU citizens of course. BTW, does anybody know what happens to drug money when it is seized?

heruamon said: Darc Requiem said: ssj12 said: NJ5 said: heruamon said: nojustno said: Wow that must burn a hole in their finances This is going to be a fight at the WTO...because this smacks of a set of countries shaking down some foreign companies. How can this be such a big deal if California with its 35 million population has fined Microsoft for $1.1 billion, nearly the same amount? It's like a fifth of Intel's annual profit. More to the point, I don't understand what "shaking down some foreign companies" could possibly accomplish here, other than the openly stated objective of making the "free market" be a reality unaffected by Intel's monopolisation attempts. It's not like AMD is a European company. There isn't even a single significant European company competing in this market.   I'm still not to sure Intel has tried to monopolize anything. I thinks its because Intel has just been around for a while and had great products across the spectrum that they got so big. If AMD really wanted to compete they would try to develop their own technologies rather than base their their entire line of CPUs off technologies owned by the competitor. Unlike the Microsoft case I have a feeling Intel might be close to innocent here. They might have offered incentives but companies could have easily said no to them. In the end why isn't the manufacturers who took the incentives/bribes in trouble? Correct me if I'm wrong but where Intel and AMD apart of the same company originally? Also given the amount of legacy code support required for the PC platform, wouldn't coming up with a completely different architecture cause compatibility issues?     ROFLMAO...you're kidding right...

No I'm not actually. Although I was mistaken about Intel and AMD being part of the same company. Their founders were apart of the same company. They both worked at Fairchild Semiconductor before leaving in the late 60s to form Intel and AMD respectively.