RealTime IT News

AMD Fires Back in Intel Antitrust Case Challenge

In a sharply worded filing, AMD sent a response to the U.S. District Court in Delaware disputing Intel's request to have AMD's case restricted to U.S. sales.

Earlier this month, Intel filed a motion with the court, suggesting that because AMD's chips were manufactured overseas and largely distributed outside the U.S. that its antitrust charges should be addressed by foreign courts or regulatory bodies. Intel did not suggest there were legal grounds to dismiss the U.S. case AMD has brought, only that its scope be restricted to U.S. sales.

"We're prepared to defend the entire case," Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy told internetnews.com in early May after its filing. "We just don't want to waste our time and money and that of the court's if a good portion of the case is not eligible under U.S. law."

In its response today, AMD said there is a single worldwide market for microprocessors that Intel has sought to illegally monopolize from its U.S. headquarters.

AMD's filing said in part that Intel's foreign conduct "has direct domestic effects on the U.S. portion of this global business, and as Intel necessarily concedes, domestic effects are sufficient to confer U.S. antitrust jurisdiction."

AMD's head of legal affairs Tom McCoy also disputed Intel's claim insisting there are no foreign commerce claims for the court to dismiss.

"AMD has brought a single claim focused on the single, global market aimed at the single pattern of monopoly abuse conducted by a single firm," said McCoy, in a statement emailed to internetnews.com.

"In a single, global market for x86 microprocessors it is impossible to calculate Intel's market share without counting all of the sales to any firm located anywhere in the world…. in a single, global market, what happens in Osaka does not stay in Osaka."

In its earlier motion, Intel cited several cases, including Matsushita Electric versus Zenith Radio, which said in part "American antitrust laws do not regulate the competitive conditions of other nations' economies."

It is now up to Judge Joseph Farnan to rule on which of the two filings will hold sway going forward.

AMD's complaint charges Intel with engaging with illegal, anti-competitive practices that have discouraged PC and server manufacturers from buying AMD processors. Intel has vigorously denied those charges.

In a controversial move that doesn't seem to have hurt its growing market share, AMD has aggressively knocked its larger competitor's alleged misdeeds at every opportunity. AMD also has set up a special Web site detailing its charges and progress in the case.

Ironically, an AMD spokesman claimed the biggest number of hits from a single domain to the Web site comes from Intel.com.