Thursday, June 5th 2008

Intel Fined USD $25.4 Million in South Korea

Chip maker Intel was fined USD $25.4 million (£13m) by the Korea Fair Trade Commission on Tuesday for taking advantage from its dominant position in the microprocessor market against rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). The Commission fined Intel because it was offering discounts to Samsung Electronics Co. and Trigem Computer Inc. that were against the Korean antitrust rules. Intel had offered about $37 million in rebates to Samsung and Trigem for over two and a half years on the condition that they wouldn't buy from Advanced Micro, according to commission's statement. Intel said it was very unhappy with the ruling and will further review the South Korean commission's decision. "We are disappointed with the decision. We feel the commission has overlooked or ignored key evidence that demonstrates Intel's business practices have been fair and lawful," Intel's Asia Pacific regional spokesman Nick Jacobs said in a statement. "Once we've had a chance to review the findings in detail it is possible that Intel will request a further review and, if necessary, an appeal which will permit a court to review the case independently." Since 2005, Intel has also been hit by anti-trust cases in the US, Japan and Europe.
Sources: Bloomberg, AFP
Add your own comment

62 Comments on Intel Fined USD $25.4 Million in South Korea

#26
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
well its not as if Intel hasn't done anything similar to this in the past - do u guys remember the incident which involved Intel paying the fab plants more to make more INTEL chips & LESS AMD chips..this was a few months ago i think Intel are walking all over AMD like carpet.

it must be so frustrating for AMD. maybe some people who design the AMD chips shouldn't be where they are.

they need to get rid of a few of them people then hire new people in cuz it sounds like their design team are really scraping the bottom of the barrel for ideas & because of that mentality/mindset nothing productive comes out of it asside from something theyve already done before - - - U.L.V Chips.

their infrastructure needs restructuring - they need to root out the personnel that bring NOTHING to the table & get rid of them to make way for fresh blood & also fresh ideas - somebody who will really push the design team forward
Posted on Reply
#27
niko084
I can agree thats dirty tactics, but thats business also...

I'm only waiting for AMD to make a large strike back at Intel, as has happened in the past and as will happen again.
Posted on Reply
#28
cool_recep
niko084I'm only waiting for AMD to make a large strike back at Intel, as has happened in the past and as will happen again.
I don't think that this will happen. Because this time Intel is more clever than ever. I am sure they have something to show when AMD comes out with it's new CPU...

BTW AMD has problems with the community. Look around. Intel is everywhere. They make competitions, they support events..activities... I mean they are active. AMD is kinda passive.
Posted on Reply
#29
suraswami
niko084I can agree thats dirty tactics, but thats business also...

I'm only waiting for AMD to make a large strike back at Intel, as has happened in the past and as will happen again.
Everybody waiting for that miracle to happen. But they constantly loose business and how the hell are they going to genrate funds for real research and on real brains. A company needs to breathe a bit, think and march forward. If constantly being stabbed I don't know if that is good.
Posted on Reply
#30
niko084
cool_recepI don't think that this will happen. Because this time Intel is more clever than ever. I am sure they have something to show when AMD comes out with it's new CPU...

BTW AMD has problems with the community. Look around. Intel is everywhere. They make competitions, they support events..activities... I mean they are active. AMD is kinda passive.
AMD can be passive, they build a lot more than processors for pc's.... While they show massive losses on one side of the company they have huge money comming from other sides. Watch their stock value instead of reading the news :)
Posted on Reply
#31
panchoman
Sold my stars!
this is... unfortunatly, just the tip of the iceberg.. google will find you an assload of intel atrosities..

and it a low fine if you ask me... intel made more profit outta it then what they paid..
Posted on Reply
#32
FR@NK
I'm shocked by most of the comments here.....Intel was offering these rebates back when Intel's line of chips was the Pentium 4. There wasnt any Core 2's back in 2005. Clearly everyone here will agree that the Pentium 4 was much slower and no way as good as the AMD64 chips. Intel used these marketing techniques so they wouldnt be crushed by AMD. It was a tough time for intel and they had to survive.
Posted on Reply
#33
jbunch07
intel is always gettin sued or fined for something. you would think they would learn.
Posted on Reply
#34
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
sound like a BS law. intel has every right to offer deals to other companies in turn for not buying AMD products. that is how business works. but since intel has a better business model and a better product they are fined for being to good. cause you know AMD does the same thing.
Posted on Reply
#35
lilkiduno
INtel is produces good CPU's but AMD is more Affordable. Intel prices are rather high for some of there products and AMD is the SHIT
Posted on Reply
#36
thoughtdisorder
Easy Rhinosound like a BS law. intel has every right to offer deals to other companies in turn for not buying AMD products. that is how business works. but since intel has a better business model and a better product they are fined for being to good. cause you know AMD does the same thing.
+1. Exactly! It happens in almost every Industry!

Like I said before (with a tad of sarcasm): Shame on you Intel for being such a fierce competitor! :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#37
DaedalusHelios
I don't think it was necessary, but its not that big of a deal. There are far greater injustices that don't have a big company like AMD as backing for the court to punish Intel.

Look at the way companies get around providing benefits to workers by using temp agencies. Its far worse and the US does nothing about it.
Posted on Reply
#38
thoughtdisorder
DaedalusHeliosI don't think it was necessary, but its not that big of a deal. There are far greater injustices that don't have a big company like AMD as backing for the court to punish Intel.

Look at the way companies get around providing benefits to workers by using temp agencies. Its far worse and the US does nothing about it.
Good point! Drug companies are one of the worst as well. More and more we hear of Doctors getting in trouble for taking kick backs from Pharmaceutical companies for writing scripts for their drugs versus the other drug manufacturers. That's scary when greed makes certain doctors overlook the potential health of a patient! Yet it happens all too often.:shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#39
DaedalusHelios
thoughtdisorderGood point! Drug companies are one of the worst as well. More and more we hear of Doctors getting in trouble for taking kick backs from Pharmaceutical companies for writing scripts for their drugs versus the other drug manufacturers. That's scary when greed makes certain doctors overlook the potential health of a patient! Yet it happens all too often.:shadedshu
I agree totally, and I wish these things would change. We need somebody in power that cares.:ohwell:
Posted on Reply
#40
lilkiduno
i agree with the both of you. Doctors get paid well, and new drugs may help the factor it's givin to you for but could do more serious damage in the future
Posted on Reply
#41
niko084
Easy Rhinosound like a BS law. intel has every right to offer deals to other companies in turn for not buying AMD products. that is how business works. but since intel has a better business model and a better product they are fined for being to good. cause you know AMD does the same thing.
It is but at the same point they need to be in place to protect companies from going out of business. Its illegal in most countries to have a monopoly, and really for good reason also obviously. Well there are 2 ways to have a monopoly, wipe out your competition or buy them out.

Really those types of laws are good, can you imagine what you would pay for your processor if Intel was the only company making them?

Look at the prices of Windows in countries piracy is illegal in vs countries its legal in...

Look at old Machintosh processor prices, when they were still using Motorola chips, they were outrageous because they were the only company that made them.

It all falls down into the same reason in the US we have laws against holding massive amounts of currency, its simply to protect the rest of the country from there being no money in circulation. Imagine what would happen if a few of the super rich in this country decided to cash in their bank accounts, how much physical money would be held up not moving around, we would have some serious issues.
Posted on Reply
#42
Unregistered
ShadowFoldWow.. So they were trying to get big companies to not buy AMD? Thats pretty freakin low.
+1 on that, thats very low. The should check themselves before trying to pull a stunt like that in the future. Idiots.
#43
imperialreign
Easy Rhinosound like a BS law. intel has every right to offer deals to other companies in turn for not buying AMD products. that is how business works. but since intel has a better business model and a better product they are fined for being to good. cause you know AMD does the same thing.
as much as this is very much the truth - a lot of Intel's tactics went beyond just "aggressive business practices" and were more along the lines of "mob-like business practices" It wasn't that they offered deals to certain vendors now and then - it was that everyonce in a while Intel would threaten to pull their business if target company didn't comply with their unreasonable demands.

This is just the start of a chain reaction, as Intel still has numerous lawsuits and investigations pending in Asia, Europe and the United States.

AMD has been very docile in their business practices over the years, and have bitten the bullet hard when they were behind, they've been more than willing to admit when their new CPUs don't meet expectations, or when they've run into unforseen issues (i.e. Phenoms), and they usually don't make any statements when Intel gets on it's ego-trip; but it's at the point now where they've had to say something, and even still they've been rather quiet about it instead of making a massive-deal over it.

breakfree.amd.com/en-us/default.aspx

Keep in mind also, that a lot of these investigations have come from 3rd parties - meaning these organizations have been under no pressure at all from AMD; they noticed something was up to begin with, or they recieved a tip-off from an anonymous source.


As much as I've supported Intel over the years, and still do, I'd love to see them get bitch-slapped right about now.
Posted on Reply
#44
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
Honestly, volume discounts arent problems nor are the rebates. The problem lies with shunning out AMD from being successful to a point as well as other things. I honestly dont blame intel for wanting more business, nor AMD, but shoddy tactics are shoddy tactics. You cant be all by yourself on this. I disagree with AMD doing that. When they came out with the A64 it was better than pentium 4 on most basis, but yet, Intel still sold a buttload of their procs. I can remember when Dell and Gateway were strictly Intel with very few AMD computers from Gateway. AMD really didnt have much to sell their procs too. Anyways, its a low amount, but it wont do any good. I think Korea was just wanting to get paid something. I dont dislike innovation or discounts, but I hate bullying practices.

EDIT: Posted right after Imperial, but he is right and I second what he says. He said it alot better than me.
Posted on Reply
#45
Millenia
newtekie1Meh, it goes on daily in every industry by every large company. I bet AMD has even done it from time to time too.
That I doubt; AMD has never been so rich it could just afford to bribe other companies to gain more market share.
Posted on Reply
#46
a111087
thoughtdisorder+1. Exactly! It happens in almost every Industry!
Like I said before (with a tad of sarcasm): Shame on you Intel for being such a fierce competitor! :rolleyes:
alright, so you want monopoly? because that is what will happen if Intel will continue to use such tactics. that will be a big stop for pc industry and you will sit with your core2due for many many years to come...
Posted on Reply
#47
Easy Rhino
Linux Advocate
niko084It is but at the same point they need to be in place to protect companies from going out of business. Its illegal in most countries to have a monopoly, and really for good reason also obviously. Well there are 2 ways to have a monopoly, wipe out your competition or buy them out.

Really those types of laws are good, can you imagine what you would pay for your processor if Intel was the only company making them?

Look at the prices of Windows in countries piracy is illegal in vs countries its legal in...

Look at old Machintosh processor prices, when they were still using Motorola chips, they were outrageous because they were the only company that made them.

It all falls down into the same reason in the US we have laws against holding massive amounts of currency, its simply to protect the rest of the country from there being no money in circulation. Imagine what would happen if a few of the super rich in this country decided to cash in their bank accounts, how much physical money would be held up not moving around, we would have some serious issues.
i understand, but you act as if intel just poofed into existance and was uber rich. they started small and have built up solid business because consumers buy their products. they make superior processors and are great at marketing them. they are also great at working with other companies which boosts their industry market share. all things investors love. intel is crushing amd because intel is a better company, not because amd is being abused in some way. i love amd to death, but let's face it, it is a crap company. which is why govts around the world want to protect it. this behavior is not in the consumers best interest nor is it the responsibility of a govt elected by a free people. if amd were not protected by govts around the world it would probably be dead right now and another company would have taken its place. nvidia wants to enter the cpu market and are working on innovative ways to change the industry. protecting amd stifles nvidia's push into the cpu market.
Posted on Reply
#48
pentastar111
a111087alright, so you want monopoly? because that is what will happen if Intel will continue to use such tactics. that will be a big stop for pc industry and you will sit with your core2due for many many years to come...
Yep...It would a sad state of affairs...Imagine if you will that GM bullied everyone else in the automotive industry so that the ONLY vehicles available were hummers and full size 4X4's and those obominations called SUV's... Seems that Intel is trying to do just that..trying to take away our option to choose...
Posted on Reply
#49
niko084
Easy Rhinoi understand, but you act as if intel just poofed into existance and was uber rich. they started small and have built up solid business because consumers buy their products. they make superior processors and are great at marketing them. they are also great at working with other companies which boosts their industry market share. all things investors love. intel is crushing amd because intel is a better company, not because amd is being abused in some way. i love amd to death, but let's face it, it is a crap company. which is why govts around the world want to protect it. this behavior is not in the consumers best interest nor is it the responsibility of a govt elected by a free people. if amd were not protected by govts around the world it would probably be dead right now and another company would have taken its place. nvidia wants to enter the cpu market and are working on innovative ways to change the industry. protecting amd stifles nvidia's push into the cpu market.
By all means I'm not saying that either... But you can't hold a law for certain companies in certain positions and not for ones in others either... Its gray and ya it sounds really stupid, but in the end they are in place for good reason.
Posted on Reply
#50
turtile
Easy Rhinoi understand, but you act as if intel just poofed into existance and was uber rich. they started small and have built up solid business because consumers buy their products. they make superior processors and are great at marketing them. they are also great at working with other companies which boosts their industry market share. all things investors love. intel is crushing amd because intel is a better company, not because amd is being abused in some way. i love amd to death, but let's face it, it is a crap company. which is why govts around the world want to protect it. this behavior is not in the consumers best interest nor is it the responsibility of a govt elected by a free people. if amd were not protected by govts around the world it would probably be dead right now and another company would have taken its place. nvidia wants to enter the cpu market and are working on innovative ways to change the industry. protecting amd stifles nvidia's push into the cpu market.
Nvidia doesn't have a x86 license. It can't enter the CPU market.

IBM chose Intel to produce the processors for their PCs. However, IBM's policy required that there needs to be two sources (basic economics - helps IBM). AMD made clones of Intel's chips until Intel refused to allow AMD to use their design. AMD was then forced to produce Intel's design without any knowledge of the design.

After Intel released many designs, AMD decided to make their own designs which wasn't too long ago. AMD has been much smaller than Intel and still managed to produce a chip that was better than Intel.

If one company becomes a monopoly, it hurts inovation and jacks the price up. Thats why their should be at least two companies. It is best in theory to have two companies compete with 50/50 market share. (pretty much impossible)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 27th, 2024 01:38 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts