4 European Nations Accused of Unfairly Favoring Intel
625801
The European Commission said today that France, the Netherlands, Sweden and Finland had unfairly favored Intel in public contracts for computer equipment.
199575
Four executives at Infineon Technologies AG and its US subsidiary, Infineon Technologies North America Corp., are to plead guilty to participating in an international conspiracy to fix prices in the DRAM market, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) said
26370
(InfoWorld) - European Commission antitrust officials investigating computer chip maker Intel presented what they believe is a watertight argument for prosecuting the firm to an internal panel of so-called devil's advocates on Tuesday, a person familiar with the investigation has said. Holding their case up to the scrutiny of the panel may indicate that the officials on the case are confident enough to push ahead with legal action. The panel was recently introduced into the antitrust investigation process in order to prevent poorly prepared cases turning into formal legal proceedings. Intel has been under investigation by the commission for the past five years. With a global market share in the computer chip market of around 80 percent, the company dwarfs its nearest rival, Advanced Micro Devices Inc., which accounts for the bulk of the remaining sales of chips around the world. Neither Intel nor the European Commission were immediately available to comment. Thomas M. McCoy, AMD's executive vice president of legal affairs, said in a recent interview he is confident the European Commission will take action to stop Intel abusing its dominance in the market. "The Intel investigation is coming to a close," he said, adding that he was confident it would result in Neelie Kroes, the competition commissioner, issuing a charge sheet, known as a statement of objections to the company. "I am optimistic she will push ahead with the lawsuit because she is independent from political pressure, both Intel and AMD are big employers in Europe, and because unlike other antitrust cases there are no complicated intellectual property issues at stake in this case," McCoy said. Last year the European Commission launched surprise visits on Intel's offices in Europe, confiscating documents in their hunt for evidence of illegal behavior. Last month the European regulator took over a separate investigation being conducted by German antitrust officials, into claims that Intel was forcing Europe's biggest computer retailer, Media Markt, only to stock computers fitted with Intel chips. Consumer groups have complained to the regulators that computer buyers are getting less choice as a result of Intel's tactics, which include granting rebates in return for loyalty from PC manufacturers. AMD's McCoy said Intel uses the threat of price increases to persuade PC makers like Sony Corp. and Hewlett-Packard Co. not to build PCs around AMD's chips. "Sony used to have a model running on AMD chips at any given price range but then they went 100 percent Intel. Ultimately the consumer loses through reduced choice," he said. The devil's advocate panel includes the competition department's chief economist, Damien Neven, along with colleagues in the department who aren't involved in the Intel case. If the draft case against Intel is supported by the panel, the investigating team will propose that Kroes issue a statement of objections to the company for the first time in the five years it has spent investigating Intel.
535393
A European court rules that a militant group opposing Iran's leaders was unfairly listed as a terror organization
471108
Tuesday&#39;s&#160;raid on Intel&#39;s Munich office&#160;by European Commission investigators marks the latest development in one of several antitrust cases that have dogged the world&#39;s largest chip maker for years. Here&#39;s a rundown of Intel&#39;s brushes with antitrust investigators and lawsuits around the world since 1990:1990Dec. 19: Microprocessor maker Cyrix filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Texas. &quot;Intel has engaged in a campaign of unlawful exclusionary practices to protect its coprocessor monopoly from competition by Cyrix,&quot; the company said in a statement.1991June 29: The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) informed Intel that it was investigating the company&#39;s business practices.Aug. 20: Advanced Micro Devices brought a $2 billion antitrust lawsuit against Intel in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California, alleging that Intel &quot;engaged in unlawful acts designed to secure and maintain a monopoly.&quot;Dec. 19: U.S. District Court Judge James Ware dismissed part of AMD&#39;s antitrust lawsuit against Intel because a four-year statute of limitations had passed for some actions listed in AMD&#39;s complaint. AMD declared its intention to press forward with the lawsuit anyway.1992May 28: Processor maker Chips and Technologies sued Intel for antitrust violations in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of California. The claims were a response to a Feb. 1992 patent lawsuit filed by Intel.1993Feb. 4: Chips and Technologies agreed to dismiss its 1992 antitrust claims against Intel as part of a settlement to resolve a patent dispute between the two companies.July 15: The FTC completed its investigation into Intel&#39;s business practices, saying no evidence was found to support charges of anticompetitive behavior.1994Feb. 4: Cyrix dismissed its 1990 antitrust claims against Intel as part of a patent-dispute settlement between the two companies.1995Jan. 11: AMD and Intel announced a broad legal settlement that ended several court cases between the two companies, including the 1991 antitrust lawsuit filed by AMD.1997Aug. 27: The FTC requested additional information from Intel concerning its plans to acquire Chips and Technologies, citing antitrust laws. At the time, Chips and Technologies was a major supplier of graphics chips.Sept. 25: The FTC began a second antitrust investigation into Intel&#39;s business practices. This investigation was conducted separately from the review of Intel&#39;s offer to acquire Chips and Technologies.1998Jan. 13: The FTC decided not to seek an injunction against Intel&#39;s acquisition of Chips and Technologies but announced plans to &quot;continue the investigation into the lawfulness of the acquisition.&quot;April 23: The FTC ruled that an October 1997 legal settlement between Intel and Digital Equipment that included the sale of Digital Equipment&#39;s semiconductor division, including its Alpha processor, to Intel would violate U.S. antitrust law if completed. As a result, the FTC required Digital Equipment to offer licenses for its Alpha processor to both AMD and Samsung Electronics as part of the deal.June 8: The FTC issued an antitrust ruling against Intel. The FTC found that Intel stopped providing important technical information about its products to Digital Equipment, Compaq Computer, and Intergraph after the three companies took legal action against Intel to enforce microprocessor patents they held. Intel also threatened to stop selling microprocessors to those companies, the FTC said.1999March 17: The FTC accepted a settlement with Intel over the 1998 antitrust ruling. The agreement required Intel to refrain from withholding technical information from customers involved in intellectual-property litigation with the company, but did not constitute an admission of guilt on the chip maker&#39;s part.2000Sept. 26: The FTC ended its second investigation into Intel&#39;s business practices and decided to take no further action against the company.2004Apr. 8: The Fair Trade Commission of Japan (JFTC) raided the offices of Intel&#39;s Japanese subsidiary and several Japanese computer companies as part of an investigation into Intel&#39;s business practices.2005March 8: JFTC ruled that Intel violated Japanese antitrust laws and hurt competition in the country&#39;s processor market.March 31:&#160;Intel disputed the JFTC&#39;s findings, but did not contest them and agreed to refrain from certain business practices.June 27: AMD filed an antitrust lawsuit against Intel in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The lawsuit detailed allegations of anticompetitive behavior by Intel in the U.S., Asia and Europe.June 30:&#160;AMD sued Intel&#160;in the Tokyo High Court and the Tokyo District Court, seeking more than $50 million in damages arising from the chip maker&#39;s anticompetitive actions in Japan.July 12: European Commission investigators raided the offices of Intel and PC manufacturers in several countries as part of an antitrust investigation.2006Feb. 9: Korean Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) officials&#160;raided Intel offices in South Korea.July 17: AMD filed a complaint against Intel with Germany&#39;s Federal Cartel Office, claiming that a deal betwen Intel and retailer Media Markt blocked the sale of computers based on AMD processors at hundreds of retail outlets.Sept. 11: European Commission antitrust officials announced plans to investigate the complaint filed in Germany by AMD against Intel and Media Markt.2007July 27: The European Commission&#160;charged Intel with antitrust violations. It accused Intel of offering rebates to PC manufacturers that buy the majority of their processors from Intel, paying PC manufacturers to delay or cancel products based on AMD processors, and selling processors below cost when bidding against AMD for contracts with server makers.Sept. 12: The KFTC issued preliminary antitrust charges against Intel while continuing its investigation into the company&#39;s business practices in South Korea.2008Jan. 10: The New York State Attorney General launched an antitrust investigation of Intel. The chip maker was served with a subpoena seeking information on its pricing practices and &quot;possible attempts to exclude competitors through market domination.&quot;Feb. 12: European Commission investigators raided Intel&#39;s office in Munich. The offices of retailers Media Markt and DSG International were also raided by investigators.
390802
Judge Joseph Farnan ruled this afternoon that AMD may seek reconsideration for its claim that Intel's allegedly anti-competitive conduct outside the U.S. directly impacts AMD's business inside the U.S. The claim is key to AMD's case, which alleges that Intel's business practices with international partners harmed its ability to do business here.
373894
The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has launched four investigations involving the import of computers or electronic device components, including one based on a complaint that several companies are violating patents on DRAM chips.
388291
Intel offices in Munich were raided by the European Commission on Tuesday as part of an ongoing antitrust investigation.
270795
Allegations from the Korea Fair Trade Commission mark the third time in the past two years that an international government has taken a deeper look into Intel's business practices.
537504
The European Commission charged Wednesday (Oct. 13) that the governments of France, the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden are favoring microprocessors from Intel when procuring PCs, thus violating European Union ...
590021
The European Commission confirmed Monday it has received a written response to the&#160;formal antitrust charges&#160;it filed against computer chip maker Intel, after some delays.
697502
Judge Joseph Farnan ruled this afternoon that AMD may seek reconsideration for its claim that Intel's allegedly anti-competitive conduct outside the U.S. directly impacts AMD's business inside the U.S. The claim is key to AMD's case against Intel.
740676
The European Commission has turned up the volume in its investigation of Intel's conduct, with retailers in Germany and Great Britain now confirming they've been raided -- the same retailers mentioned in AMD's civil suit against Intel.
202757
The European Union alleges the memory chip designer demanded 'âunreasonableâ' royalties for its patents that were fraudulently set as industry standards.
153402
European Commission is looking into claims that Intel has been pressuring Europe's largest computer chain.
189744
The European Commission confirmed Monday it has received a written response to the&#160;formal antitrust charges&#160;it filed against computer chip maker Intel, after some delays.&quot;We have received the company&#39;s response and are examining it carefully,&quot; said a person close to the competition department.In July the Commission accused the world&#39;s biggest maker of computer chips of handing out &quot;substantial rebates&quot; to computer manufacturers in return for buying the bulk of their x86 chips from Intel.It also accused the company of paying computer makers for scrapping or delaying the launch of machines fitted with AMD chips, and of selling its chips for server computers at below cost to large customers such as governments and universities.Such practices are illegal under European antitrust law when applied by companies that dominate their market, as Intel does.In addition to the written response filed Monday, Intel has also asked the Commission for the opportunity to respond to the charges face-to-face in an oral hearing, said Chuck Mulloy, a company spokesman in Santa Clara, California. The Commission will decide the date&#39;s oral hearing.&quot;It will be a while before the hearing. The Commission staff will have to read our substantial response,&quot; Mulloy said.Intel asked twice for extra time to prepare the written response. The initial deadline was in October. That was shifted to Jan. 4. Then, as the new deadline loomed, Intel asked for the weekend to complete the document.&quot;There were some loose ends that needed to be addressed. It was nothing unusual,&quot; Mulloy said.
365153
European officials investigating the chip maker say they have a watertight argument for pursuing antitrust charges.