AMD v. Intel: More companies subpoenaed

Advanced Micro Devices said on Thursday that it served more than 15 companies with subpoenas this week as of part of its antitrust lawsuit against rival Intel.

Computer makers and a dozen distributors and retailers--including three companies that hadn't been subpoenaed by AMD before--were served papers as AMD seeks information related to its claims against Intel.

AMD filed suit against Intel in June, alleging that Intel has a monopoly on microprocessors and used targeted discounts and strong-arm tactics to cut AMD out of the market. Intel denies AMD's claims, saying its dominance in the market is due to its investments in research and development and in manufacturing.

AMD spokesman Michael Silverman said AMD is not suing the subpoenaed companies but trying to extract evidence.

"AMD views these third parties as victims of Intel's misconduct and therefore hopes to obtain these documents in the manner least burdensome to them," he said, noting that many of the companies receiving subpoenas have already been notified that they would be questioned.

Among those receiving requests this week to produce documents were Dell, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Lenovo Group, Gateway, Sun Microsystems, NEC and units of Fujitsu, as well as retailers Circuit City and Best Buy. Many of the companies have already agreed to protect their correspondence with Intel.

Three new names were also added to the list: Appro International, based in Milpitas, Calif., and MPC Computers and Egenera, both out of Wilmington, Del., Silverman said, but gave no specific reason for their addition to the list.

Lawyers for both sides mutually agreed to delay their exchange of evidence despite a request by the judge handling the case, Joseph J. Farnan Jr., of the Delaware District Court, that AMD and Intel exchange pertinent information on the case by Thursday.

The delay was due to the large number of documents that both parties are sifting through, Silverman said.

Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy said he had not heard back from his legal team in Delaware on when the exchange would be rescheduled.

People familiar with the lawsuit say it is not expected to come to trial until 2007 at the earliest.

In its complaint, AMD claimed that Intel imposed scare tactics and coercion on 38 companies, including large-scale computer makers, small system builders, wholesale distributors and retailers.

Intel countered with a 63-page reply in September, emphatically denying having a monopoly on PC microprocessors and locking out AMD from deals with computer manufacturers through threats and targeted rebates.

Reuters contributed to this report.

[System Tyrant]

AMD

may just be putting nails in it's own coffin. How many of these companies are going to want to do business with little AMD if they know if will make big Intel angry and could cause problems with most computer makers biggest supplier of chips. If Intel was willing to strong arm these companies and they are afraid of Intel then they will probably fight this tooth and nail.

I also figure that those companies don't want to be put into the public spotlight for this either.

[bryanyurko]

Intel knows what resellers need!!

My company used to sell hundreds of AMD CPUs per month! We had nothing but problems with compatibility issues - never had problems with Intel! Since Intel manufacturers their own chipset and mainboards, it makes for a seamless integration. Also, AMD never gave us advance notice of price moves - Intel would give us a roadmap and at least 2 weeks notice of major price so we could adjust our inventory levels. The way we found out about AMD price moves was from our customers!! Needless to say, we had to sell a lot of AMD CPUs below cost just to move our inventory.

Intel is head and shoulders above AMD when it comes to supporting resellers!!!

[System Tyrant]

That's funny.

I don't sell hardware, but I have a friend in the business who sell's both AMD and Intel and we were talking about that very subject the other day. According to him it's just the opposit. He also say's that getting Intel to warranty a defective part is extremely hard. Of course he also says Microsoft will be gone in five years now that Apple is moving to the PC platform.

The real funny thing is he use to hate AMD. According to him they were the kind of junk you could pay somebody to take. Now he pushes them and only sell's Intel when a customer request it.

I only say this because it struck me funny. I personally think Intel is a good company that is going through some changes and AMD is hitting a good streak with their products. I figure when Intel drops the P4 in favor of the P-M dual cores we are really going to see competition heat up and I would be willing to bet that Intel isn't going to lose.

[DevildogCO1]

Have to side with AMD......

In my opiinion all you have to do is compare the two product lines. Intel has been pushing the same tired P4 for years now with no major changes to it and has said in public that its dual core P4 is a joke. Meanwhile, AMD has moved forward fast. They have nearly replaced their entire line to fast stable 64-bit chips, and seem to have better vision for multi-core CPUs. So if Intel isn't conducting business with illegal tactics, then what is the reason companys stay with them? Because it can't be product quality.

[Rusdude]

Discounts & Marketing

Just because something is supposedly better, doesn't mean it's going to be a successful product. After all, Betamax was better than VHS, and OS X is viewed to be superior to Windows.

In this case, a lot of it has to do with money and marketing. Intel hands out heavy discounts and has aggressive marketing campaigns (lately, it's been the Centrino chip). I provide some rationale in my earlier reply but I suggest you also check out business/tech publications for more info.

[JCiLord]

AMD vs Intel

If AMD can prove what the lawsuit states then I hope they win. Intels slick & I don't find it hard to believe that they may have done many of the things the lawsuit alledges. Whether or not those activities are illegal is a moot point to me. The bottom line is Intel is trying to eliminate the competion. At the end of the day, that would not be good for anyone. Competion in business is vital to new advances, technology not to mention pricing. They are walking a fine line...so fine in fact they didn't even fight the similar charges that came from the Japanese Trade Commision. Whether or not AMD has better or worse support is relevant to the case but not a main factor. The lawsuit focuses on Intel's activities. The problem as I see it, is that AMD MUST prove that those activities caused damage to them, the retailers and/or the public. That'll be a big challenge. But again at the end of the day, to me, it is the activities themselves that are borderline unfair.AMD has won against Intel before and I believe they will again, to some degree.