Intel: EC Failed to Meet 'Standard of Proof' for $1.45 Billion Fine

Intel (INTC) said Europe’s top antitrust regulator failed “to meet the required standard of proof” when it fined the chip maker $1.45 billion for anti-competitive behavior against AMD. The news comes as Apple named Intel’s top lawyer Bruce Sewell as its general counsel.

Intel noted that it would appeal and the company recently laid out its case against the European Commission (EC). In a nutshell, Intel argues that the EC:

• Failed to address evidence that AMD was increasing market share during the period in question;
• Failed to establish a causal link between Intel’s discounts and customer decisions not to use AMD;
• Failed to analyze how those discounts impacted consumers at all;
• And failed to stick to legal procedures as it decided to fine Intel.

Also see: EU ombudsman slaps antitrust regulators over Intel case

• EC: Intel ‘abused dominant position’ vs AMD; fined record $1.45 billion in antitrust case

The stakes are high as AMD cited the EC fine as a big win. A key passage from the appeal:

The Commission fails to prove that Intel’s rebate arrangements were conditional upon its customers purchasing all or almost all of their x86 CPU requirements from Intel. In addition, the Commission uses an ‘as efficient competitor’ (‘AEC’) test to determine whether Intel’s rebates were capable of restricting competition but it commits numerous errors in the analysis and assessment of the evidence relating to the application of that test. The Commission also fails to address other categories of evidence relevant to the effects of Intel’s discounts.

The company is asking that the EC decision be nixed completely, “annul or reduce substantially the level of the fine imposed” and pay Intel’s legal costs.

Comments

[Smart1:]

They should get that $1.4 Bn back.....Maybe they will give it to the shareholders. That should be about $.28/share....

Sep 15 07:04 PM

[principle:]

Its just a bunch of bull, now companies get to decide what the rules are??? Why is anyone allowing the defendent to say what the requirements of the court were. It is not their place, and its unethical.

Intel expects the court to predict what a future would be like if Intel didnt break the law????

Sep 15 08:51 PM

[KIT:]

Anyone can appeal, thats court structure. At over a billion loss they have to try. Winning, well throw the dice........

Sep 15 11:32 PM