Not Just Microsoft

[unixronin]

The EU has just hit Intel with a $1.45 billion fine for “engaging in illegal anticompetitive practices to exclude competitors from the market”, referring specifically to dirty tricks targeting AMD.

Between October 2002 and December 2007, Intel held more than 70 percent of the worldwide x86 CPU market. The Commission found that during the period in question, Intel engaged in two illegal practices. The first was that it gave wholly or partially hidden rebates to computer manufacturers on the condition that they buy all or almost all of their x86 CPUs from Intel. This illegal practice also included Intel’s making direct payments to a major retailer so that it would stock only computers with Intel x86 CPUs.

The second illegal practice was that Intel made direct payments to computer manufacturers to halt or delay the launch of specific products containing competitors’ x86 CPUs and to limit the sales channels available to these products.

The computer manufacturers named by the Commission as being involved in the rebates and payments included Acer, Dell, Hewlett-Packard, Lenovo, and NEC. The retailer was Media Saturn Holding, the parent company of the MediaMarkt chain.

You know, I’d probably feel better about buying Intel products if Intel apparently believed it could compete fairly with AMD on a level playing field. Every time I hear about another case of Intel playing below-the-belt like this, it makes me feel more strongly that if Intel is this afraid of AMD — and this dishonest — I should be continuing to buy AMD products, not Intel.

Naturally, Intel doesn’t think it did anything wrong:

Intel said in a statement Wednesday that it did not believe its practices had violated European law and that it would appeal the fine.

“Intel takes strong exception to this decision,” the chipmaker’s chief executive, Paul Otellini, said in the statement. “We believe the decision is wrong and ignores the reality of a highly competitive microprocessor marketplace — characterized by constant innovation, improved product performance and lower prices. There has been absolutely zero harm to consumers. Intel will appeal.”

Oh, really? This is all fair and above-board? I suppose that’s why Intel tried to conceal what it was doing it, is it? Just suppose for one moment that AMD, not Intel, had been doing this, and imagine the resulting howls of outrage we would be hearing from Intel.

Intel has three months to pay the €1.06 billion fine, the largest ever assessed by the EU. If they don’t, they’ll likely be hit with additional penalties — like the €899 million penalty the EU hit Microsoft with in February 2008, after Microsoft failed to pay the €497 million fine assessed against it by the EU in 2004, the previous largest-ever EU antitrust fine.

Comments

[radarrider]

Otellini said, "There has been absolutely zero harm to consumers." Regardless of whether or not this is true (and I ain't saying it is), European laws regarding anticompetitive behavior are geared more toward protecting competition than protecting consumers. Even if Intel can prove this statement to be true, if it's determined that AMD was injured, they'll still be on the block.

In the US, it's the other way around. That's why the browser wars had a different result here than in the EU.