jaclaz Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 I am surprised noone posted anything about the matter yet. From BBC:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8047546.stmIt dwarfs the 497m euro fine levied on Microsoft in 2004 for abusing its dominant market position. The Commission found that between 2002 and 2007, Intel had paid manufacturers and a retailer to favour its chips over those of Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). Intel has announced that it will appeal against the verdict.....Ms Kroes joked in her own news conference that Intel would now have to change its latest advertising slogan from "sponsors of tomorrow" to "the sponsor of the European taxpayer"..... B) jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigeratiPrime Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 I am not surprised, I've heard from people working from OEM's about these rebates; seems to be a common practice. Also the EU seems to like going after big *US* companies *cough* because it's easy money. With that said I am not familiar with the details, but bribery is a criminal offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrofLuigi Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 It's nothing new...GL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaclaz Posted May 15, 2009 Author Share Posted May 15, 2009 (edited) It's nothing new...GLWell, the decision of the EU commission is new, on 13th May 2009, of course the claim is not.Until then, AMD said that Intel used unfair commercial practices, now the EU has judged this allegation to be true.jaclaz Edited May 15, 2009 by jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrofLuigi Posted May 15, 2009 Share Posted May 15, 2009 I've heard from people working from OEM's about these rebatesof course the claim is not.I was going for that, because I remembered an old article that explained the "intel inside" "incentives" in many details. Unfortunately, couldn't find it on Google.GL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoffeeFiend Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Lots of us saw that coming for sure, and not only in the EU.the EU seems to like going after big *US* companies *cough* because it's easy moneyCould be, but regardless of that, Intel was most definitely deserving of it.Giving companies rebates based on NOT selling your competitors' products? That's not exactly "playing nice"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbolt 2864 Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Yep, I read that, and I must say, I'm very disappointed with Intel. They deserved it, just because they are the leader of the CPU market doesn't give them the right to further abuse their power and try to roadblock their rival by giving bribes to their partners not to sell AMD products. They played with fire and got burnt at the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaclaz Posted May 16, 2009 Author Share Posted May 16, 2009 I was going for that, because I remembered an old article that explained the "intel inside" "incentives" in many details. Unfortunately, couldn't find it on Google.Some details are given here:http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction...;guiLanguage=enApart Media Saturn Holding that is in "plain text", who are A, B, C, D, E ?Names should be:http://www.reuters.com/article/technologyN...E5491Q820090510NECHPDELLLENOVO???Let's try coupling them:HP=BNEC=CDELL=D ? or DELL=A?http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23076019/then LENOVO either A or DWhat else? Who is E?jaclaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointertovoid Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 That's a VERY BIG fine, but the EU has VERY BIG budget needs as well...I don't remember exactly what, but the US gov had done something unpleasant to the EU just before, so the instant was ripe for this action.What I strongly dislike with such a justice is that the decision is made by a (inter-) governmental agency. The EU Commission itself decides a fine. This is not the way a democracy works, and as a direct consequence, its work doesn't meet democratic standards neither.That is, national governments compose a EU Commission which both makes laws and the application of laws. Even worse, the EU Parliament does not oversee the EU Commission: it can't veto a decision by the Commission, and if Lisbon's Treaty passes, the Parliament won't even be allowed to decide what it discusses nor what law it would like to "suggest" (as it couldn't decide against the Commission) to the Commission. The Commission concentrates legislative, executive and judicial powers in one hand - exactly the first step a democratic Constitution would avoid.And then you get so-called "justice decisions" and "fines" which may serve just the politicians' views at some time. That's no Justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now