Intel bullying the judge
According to this report, Intel is asking the judge to dismiss AMD's anti-trust lawsuit. Intel argues that the US Court doesn't have subject jurisdiction over the matter. Basically, INTEL told the judge: "Hey, judge, our boys in Japan screwed AMD real good, so what? That's beyond the reach of damned US laws. That is none of your business. Stay away."
I think Intel's motion will be denied. Intel Japan is a wholly owned subsidiary of Intel US. Furthermore, SONY and other Japanese companies' PC products were sold in the US, affecting US consumers and US companies. US Courts definitely have jurisdiction over the parts which affected US market. All these matters are one case and should be tried as one.
Intel's argument may have some merit during the penalty phase. But throwing out a dissmissal motion at this stage based on jurisdiction will only upset the judge. This is especially true after Intel already answered AMD's complaint.
Remember, a judge is a human being. Bullying a judge does no good to your case.
posted by Sharikou, Ph. D. @ 5/04/2006 10:58:00 AM
3 Comments:
intel's motive of filing a dismissal probably is because they don't want to spend too much money on lawyering. they already spent a large sum of its cash in rush developing core architecture. juding their financial positions from 1Q report, i doubt they want to continue with the case, especially when they know this case can drag on for years.
Even if the judge dismisses the "out f US cases" for juristriction problems it will be in his mind that there is a case to answer in those areas's and then conclude that this would be a directive comming from the US HQ!. case proven, NOW pay up. Case closed.
I believe Intel already knows it's a lost case. Thats why Intel is probably not trying to weez out of this, but rather they have a 'very' strategic plan... to differ payment!
I'll explain...
If Intel successfully gets the case thrown out. And if AMD wins its case in the U.S., that would almost gurantee a win in other parts of the world too (Europe and Asia).
The difference is that Intel would have to fork out the cash (again) to defend another jurisdiction. They would have twice the laywer fees, but this is pocket change.
So instead of getting fined say $4 billion now, they would only get fined $2 billion for the U.S. market now. And then when AMD would win the European and Asian cases (say in 2011), it would have to fork over the remaining $2 billion.
In not having to give $2 billion for 3 or 4 years, you can easily earn $300+ million in interest income (or save as much if you had to borrow the money).
Post a Comment
<< Home