bit-tech.net

FTC 'close' to Intel filing

FTC 'close' to Intel filing

Intel could find itself in hot water should rumours that the Federal Trade Commission are looking to file a complaint prove true.

Reports are circling the 'net that the US Federal Trade Commission is close to filing a complaint against Intel for allegedly anti-competitive practices.

According to an article over on V3.co.uk, the FTC - which began an investigation into the chip giant's practices last year - is leaning three to four in favour of filing a complaint against Intel.

An un-named source is quoted as saying that "they're [the FTC] are close. They said it could be a matter of weeks or a matter of months when the vote happens.."

If the FTC do file a complaint against the company, it could lead to another whopper fine such as that levied against the company by the European Union in May after a similar investigation into alleged anti-competitive practices - costing the company £948 million, which Intel is currently appealing.

Despite the claims that a complaint is imminent, Intel's Chuck Mulloy has stated that Intel has "been working closely with the FTC as they conduct their investigation[, and] we would hope that the speculation is incorrect as we are continuing to work with the Commission."

If accurate, the news that the FTC is taking Intel's actions seriously will come as a great relief to rival AMD: for years the company has been accusing its rival of bullying OEMs into Intel exclusivity or limiting the number of AMD chips they can buy - something that AMD believes has resulted in an uncompetitive marketplace in Intel's favour.

Do you believe that Intel's actions represent anti-competitive behavour, or is the company simply trying to protect stockholders' interests? Share your thoughts over in the forums.

24 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
proxess 26th October 2009, 14:12 Quote
Kind of what AMD needs right now. Tho they deserved it quite a while ago.
stonedsurd 26th October 2009, 14:13 Quote
Aw, poor Intel. First the EU now the US.
Casefan 26th October 2009, 14:47 Quote
Great to here this, this is no way this could be considered fair play on Intel's part. A cool (near) Billion is gonna be great for AMD and ATi!
frojoe 26th October 2009, 15:23 Quote
This does indeed seem like justice for AMD, but I can't help but hope that they don't get fined too heavily. Until AMD catches up in the performance department, I don't want money coming away from R&D at intel. Still a god thing to deal with it if they broke the law though.
FeRaL 26th October 2009, 15:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casefan
Great to here this, this is no way this could be considered fair play on Intel's part. A cool (near) Billion is gonna be great for AMD and ATi!

AMD doesn't get the $$$ thought, the government does. Go figure...
HourBeforeDawn 26th October 2009, 15:48 Quote
ya it does suck that the gov gets it, should be like 60/40 at least, 60 gov, 40 amd. Its obvious how much Intel influences the market to use their product, Im waiting for one of these to Happen to nVidia because if there is a company that strong arms others business and devs its nVidia.
moshpit 26th October 2009, 17:43 Quote
Quote:
Do you believe that Intel's actions represent anti-competitive behavour, or is the company simply trying to protect stockholders' interests?

Why does it have to be one or the other? In this case, I think it's both. Intel was way out of line in the over-zealous protection of it's investors. I think it's a matter of both being right this time.
frontline 26th October 2009, 18:11 Quote
If they were forcing people to buy the Pentium IV in bulk they deserve the death penalty. Global warming is solely the result of NetBurst!
crazyceo 26th October 2009, 18:35 Quote
Gladly whining AMD won't get a $, which is hilarious. The amount of bad performing OEM AMD products on the market today is shocking and should be used as evidence for Intel to take to FTC to show they are completely useless anyway and the OEM's were always better for using Intel.
thehippoz 26th October 2009, 19:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by frontline
If they were forcing people to buy the Pentium IV in bulk they deserve the death penalty. Global warming is solely the result of NetBurst!

lol yeah before core 2's came along.. I was wondering who was buying those chips outside the pre-builts- they were making tons of money and pushing crap.. reminded me of creative

ever since the core 2 though.. amd and ruiz ran it into the ground
knutjb 26th October 2009, 21:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by frojoe
This does indeed seem like justice for AMD, but I can't help but hope that they don't get fined too heavily. Until AMD catches up in the performance department, I don't want money coming away from R&D at intel. Still a god thing to deal with it if they broke the law though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyceo
Gladly whining AMD won't get a $, which is hilarious. The amount of bad performing OEM AMD products on the market today is shocking and should be used as evidence for Intel to take to FTC to show they are completely useless anyway and the OEM's were always better for using Intel.

What do you think Intel was doing? By limiting sales of AMD products Intel stifled, through loss of revenue, innovation at AMD. R&D cost a lot of money. This enabled Intel to pull ahead in the current market. You don't want money coming away from R&D at Intel? That is what they did to AMD and we the consumers are the losers for that. We pay more for a lesser product when companies pull this on their competition. If AMD had more money for development what CPUs would be on the market today? This goes right along with an Intel exec who was just charged for insider trading. I would rather executives go to jail in addition to when they pull this crap than just slapping the companies deep pockets with a minor fine.
zagortenay 26th October 2009, 21:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by knutjb
What do you think Intel was doing? By limiting sales of AMD products Intel stifled, through loss of revenue, innovation at AMD. R&D cost a lot of money. This enabled Intel to pull ahead in the current market. You don't want money coming away from R&D at Intel? That is what they did to AMD and we the consumers are the losers for that. We pay more for a lesser product when companies pull this on their competition. If AMD had more money for development what CPUs would be on the market today? This goes right along with an Intel exec who was just charged for insider trading. I would rather executives go to jail in addition to when they pull this crap than just slapping the companies deep pockets with a minor fine.

Good to see some sensible comments! :)
Star*Dagger 26th October 2009, 21:49 Quote
Now that the Obama Effect of Truth and Justice is percolating down into the Federal govt Microsoft and Intel had better be on their best behavior. The EU is looking to bust Microsoft, period, they have also punched Intel a few times. Now with the FTC getting involved we might actually have a skewed playing field rather than a completely absurd one.

Yours in Anti-Trust Plasma,
Star*Dagger

.
Veles 27th October 2009, 00:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by HourBeforeDawn
ya it does suck that the gov gets it, should be like 60/40 at least, 60 gov, 40 amd.

No it shouldn't, firstly, if you break the law and are fined, the fine always goes to the government.

Secondly, AMD aren't the only other CPU manufacturer out there, they can't hand AMD the cash because it wouldn't be fair on the others either.
HourBeforeDawn 27th October 2009, 00:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Veles
Quote:
Originally Posted by HourBeforeDawn
ya it does suck that the gov gets it, should be like 60/40 at least, 60 gov, 40 amd.

No it shouldn't, firstly, if you break the law and are fined, the fine always goes to the government.

Secondly, AMD aren't the only other CPU manufacturer out there, they can't hand AMD the cash because it wouldn't be fair on the others either.

well then AMD can wait for the ruling to go through and then sue Intel directly for the loss of revenue proven by the Government for the tactics used against them by Intel.
wiak 27th October 2009, 00:58 Quote
Athlon 64/Opteron was supiror to anything intel had in 2003, but if you checked the shops, at the time you might have discovered 95% crappy* intel pentium 4 Netbust

if you didnt know the current Phenom II can trace its roots to the Opteron in 2003, heck AMD still uses a upgraded HyperTransport interface, amongs other things
TheUn4seen 27th October 2009, 01:44 Quote
It's always good to see such behaviour fined, but I'd rather see executives go to jail... we all know that ain't going to happen though. But this isn't going to help anything, Intel earns a lot more by doing this than they lose to fines, so they won't stop.
ssj12 27th October 2009, 03:47 Quote
While, if, Intel really is breaking laws then this is good. But why isnt Walmart, Microsoft, and other companies not being investigated? Walmart buys exclusive rights to special features for movies, like the IMAX version of Transformers 2, exclusive music releases, they have even had an exclusive Nintendo DS game released.
crazyceo 27th October 2009, 07:43 Quote
This is hilarious! Yeah, let's all have an AMD love'in and let's encourage fine's against Intel and blame them for all the really bad decisions AMD have made in the last 10 years. Let's forgive the completely incompetent management of AMD and poor driver developement of their products. Let's blame Intel for AMD's decision to pay way over the odds for ATI and tarnishing the ATI name by adding it to the AMD group of poorly developed products and the over hyped marketing of them.

Let's fine Intel for the death of Jesus,the rise of Hitler and the birth of Ant and Dec! You B@$t4rds Intel!

Is this comment serious enough for you?
BLC 27th October 2009, 08:20 Quote
To be quite honest, I've always found that Intel chips have always had the edge when it comes to sheer number crunching ability. Some of their business practices may have been less than reputable, for which they should rightly be punished, but that doesn't detract from the fact that they have a better product. Even in the days of the K6, or the original slot-based Athlon, Intel chips were always that little bit faster, at least in my opinion (and the opinion of many benchmarks and reviews I read at the time)

Perhaps AMDs poor performance comes from the fact that they're the perennial underdog. The way Intel did business certainly won't have helped them, but as the old maxim goes: a polished turd is still a turd.
stonedsurd 27th October 2009, 09:15 Quote
It seems people bashing AMD for performance have forgotten the S939 days.

That said, it's largely their (AMD's) own fault for their current state. Intel's anticompetitive business practices may have had something to do with it, but it can't have been much. The ATI acquisition simply cost too much.
[USRF]Obiwan 27th October 2009, 10:04 Quote
We the consumers should get both EU and FTC claimed money. We are the ones who bought the products. Not the government. So indirectly our money goes from Intel > EU gov. & US gov. Its just another pocket filler for US and EU govs and we do not benefit from it at all in both cases.
hrtz_Junkie 27th October 2009, 13:50 Quote
God one thing that never fails to amaze me is people's insistance on moaning and complaining!

First off all Intel creates a killer architecture (core 2), then they realeese I7 even more power with the added benifit of SLI and Crossfire...

What do we do?

we moan and complain about price's.

So intel revises it's line up releasing core i5 a cheaper more affordable cpu...

And what do we do?

we moan about how there not as good as i7's.....

What????? and now were moaning again about how intel conduct's it's buisness??? when we all know the tech market is a cloak and dagger game, you show me a tech company that hasn't tried to play the market in some way???

It seems to me that no matter how hard intel/microsoft try there allways going to end up the bad guy's.

Still you at least have one fan who appreciates all the hard work you've put into pc gameing and hardware!!!;)
Ficky Pucker 27th October 2009, 14:23 Quote
i think its only fair intel get half their monies taken away. ;)
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums