EU fines Intel 1.45 billion for sales tactics

[Icarium]

EU fines Intel record $1.45B for sales tactics - Yahoo! Finance

Anyone have more background on this?

This quote is pretty bizarre.

"The European Commission also told Intel to immediately cease some sales practices in Europe, though it refused to say what those were. Intel said it was "mystified" about what it was supposed to change but would comply with the "extremely ambiguous" EU order."

Is it kosher to order someone to stop doing something and then not tell them exactly what they need to stop doing?

Moreover the money goes to the EU and not to AMD...?

[Spiug31]

try this BBC NEWS | Business | EU slaps a record fine on Intel

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 harmed millions of European consumers by deliberately acting to keep competitors out of the market for computer chips for many years," said Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes.

"Such a serious and sustained violation of the EU's antitrust rules cannot be tolerated."

[Hopstretch]

Yeah, that's much better.

The Commission said that personal computer makers Acer, Dell, HP, Lenovo and NEC had all been given hidden rebates if they only used Intel chips.

It also found that Media Saturn, which owns Europe's biggest consumer electronics retailer Media Markt, had been given money so that it would only sell computers containing Intel chips.

In addition to providing rebates to manufacturers that bought almost entirely Intel products, the Commission found that the chipmaker had paid them to postpone or cancel the launch of specific products based on AMD chips.

Somewhat underhanded, certainly.

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".

Pwnt.

[Icarium]

Well if its as simple as that then why didnt they just tell them to stop doing that instead of being ambiguous about it?

Also another horrible transgression is apparently offering volume discounts that AMD can't compete with... sucks for AMD, but I'd think the consumer would benefit from that in the form of lower prices.

[Spiug31]

Well if its as simple as that then why didnt they just tell them to stop doing that instead of being ambiguous about it?

The commission issued a statement of objection in 2007 and again in 2008 (this I gleaned from the bbc world service audio report that`s part way down the page).

[Dusty Chalk]

Yeah, the "ambiguousness" is probably Intel's spin-doctors at work, knowing that most people don't know how to read legalese.

[Beefy]

Also another horrible transgression is apparently offering volume discounts that AMD can't compete with... sucks for AMD, but I'd think the consumer would benefit from that in the form of lower prices.

That is the awesome thing about competition. Everyone loves it when it is happening, but the ultimate outcome of most competitions is that somebody wins. And when that happens, everybody gets mad and props up the loser. Yay competition!

[Smeggy]

There's always a winner, but cheating is naughty so intel was sent to bed with no supper for hiding AMDs toys and telling all it's friends that it was smelly.

Not the first time intel has been slapped for being naughty to AMD I seem to recall.