Intel and AMD Having a Bit of a Squabble
Posted 10/15/09 at 05:48:37 PM by Jason Barry
Intel’s piranha legal team is currently sinking its teeth into AMD as part of its defense in the antitrust case they lost across the pond. Let the feeding begin.
Intel drew first blood asking the courts to reprimand AMD for failing to retain documents pertaining to their filing against Intel back in June of 2005. Further, they are salting the wounds by claiming that not only were the documents lost, despite AMD boasting a new document retention system, but also AMD covered up its efforts to recover said documents.
Intel claims in a court filing “AMD failed to begin retaining documents when it reasonably anticipated the litigation, something that is required by law.”
It has gotten ugly quick and this is only the beginning. Do you think Intel is merely following legal protocol, going for the throat, or just being petty?
I'm sure for every document AMD accidently lost...
Submitted by QUINTIX256 on Fri, 10/16/2009 - 3:38pm
...Intel purposely lost two. I am almost willing to bet that the documents in question are only tangentially related to the case.
Intel has already been convicted, 3 times, and this news just came out yesterday. This reeks of desperation.
You can have your recession. I'm not participating.
Revenue?
Submitted by mesiah on Thu, 10/15/2009 - 8:16pm
How does a legal defense generate revenue? You both seem to misunderstand the article. Intel is not suing AMD, they are merely defending the suit brought against them. As for being #1, 2, or 3. I would say its all 3. These are lawyers we are talking about. They are paid to win their case by shredding the opposing party in any way possible, even if it is on semantics and record keeping. Cases get thrown out all the time because of poor record keeping, so this is obviously legal protocol, unfortunately legal protocol involves both going for the throat and being petty. Would you higher a timid lawyer if you had millions or billions of dollars to lose?
You're confusing before and after.
Submitted by QUINTIX256 on Fri, 10/16/2009 - 3:45pm
Thrown out? What on earth are you talking about? This is an appealed case, as in after the verdict, not a case undergoing review before going to court.
The best intel can do at this point is get the fine reduced and throw some fud at AMD's credibility.
You can have your recession. I'm not participating.
wow
Submitted by mesiah on Fri, 10/16/2009 - 9:46pm
wow, are you really trying to argue semantics? An appeal is still part of a legal defense. Yes a ruling was made, but you are allowed to appeal it. It is not a counter suit like the people below are implying. But if it helps you to understand then in the appeals process the term thrown out can be exchanged with over turned. Is that better?
You got that right....
Submitted by ghot on Thu, 10/15/2009 - 5:32pm
#2 & #3 or nothing....Intel has suffered some pretty big losses lately....layoffs, market shares, lawsuits, etc....this is kinda a lame way to generate revenue :/
Take an OS, and edit out all the efficiency, and what you have left is a post-XP Microsoft operating system :)
following legal protocol,
Submitted by mattman059 on Thu, 10/15/2009 - 3:12pm
following legal protocol, going for the throat, or just being petty
im gonna go with #2 and #3 :)
Geez...Intel sues Nvidia, then they sue AMD...sounds like someone needs to get laid. period.
"someone needs to get
Submitted by JCBarry on Thu, 10/15/2009 - 7:30pm
"someone needs to get laid"
lol.Jay Barry
MaxPC Profile | Jason Barry
Feature
Review
Feature
Feature
Feature






