Twelve years after Intel was fined $1.2bn for unfairly running over rivals, an EU court says: No need to pay
- Reference: 1643265613
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2022/01/27/intel_eu_antitrust_fine/
- Source link:
On Wednesday, the General Court of the European Union annulled the EC antitrust penalty
[1]PDF
after previously upholding it in 2014[2]PDF
.After rival AMD complained in 2000 and again in 2003 that Intel was engaging in anti-competitive conduct by offering its hardware partners rebates for using Intel's x86 chips, an EC antitrust investigation that got underway in 2004 and concluded in 2009 [3]with a €1.06 billion penalty against Chipzilla.
[4]
The EC at the time found Intel's conduct between October 2002 and December 2007 to be anti-competitive.
[5]
[6]
"The evidence gathered by the Commission led to the conclusion that Intel's conditional rebates and payments induced the loyalty of key OEMs and of a major retailer, the effects of which were complementary in that they significantly diminished competitors' ability to compete on the merits of their x86 CPUs," the EC said in its 2009 decision. "Intel's anti-competitive conduct thereby resulted in a reduction of consumer choice and in lower incentives to innovate."
Intel [7]appealed in 2012 , calling the EC evidence inadequate and the legal analysis "hopelessly and irretrievably defective."
[8]
In 2014, [9]Intel's appeal failed when the General Court affirmed the EC arguments and upheld the fine. So Intel appealed again, this time to Europe's top court on matters of law, the European Court of Justice, which sent the case back to the General Court for reconsideration in 2017
[10]PDF
.[11]Google loses appeal against $2.7bn EU antitrust fine for distorting competition in price comparison websites
[12]Intel, HP, Tesla, etc protest to US monopoly watchdog: Are you just gonna let Qualcomm patent-tax us to death?
[13]Another US president, time for another big Intel factory promise by another CEO
[14]EC president promises European Chips Act to quadruple homegrown production by 2030
Finally, in 2022, the General Court has come around to Intel's way of seeing things.
In its decision, the General Court said, "...the analysis carried out by the Commission is incomplete and, in any event, does not make it possible to establish to the requisite legal standard that the rebates at issue were capable of having, or were likely to have, anti-competitive effects…"
Intel, now with $1.2bn more pocket change than it had yesterday, expressed satisfaction with its reversal of fortune.
"We welcome today's ruling by the General Court as we have always believed that our actions regarding rebates were lawful and did not harm competition," a company spokesperson told The Register in an emailed statement. "The semiconductor industry has never been more competitive than it is today and we look forward to continuing to invest and grow in Europe."
[15]
The EC can appeal the ruling to the European Court of Justice on matters of law.
The ruling suggests that EU trustbusters won't be able to constrain corporate behavior if alleged misconduct fails to fit within the limited definition of competitive abuse under EU law ( [16]Article 102 TFEU ). [17]According to the Associated Press, EC VP Margrethe Vestager said at a press briefing in Brussels that the EC needs more time to consider what comes next.
Even if the fine is reinstated Intel's not in the poor house. On Wednesday [18]it reported its fourth-quarter and full-year 2021 financial results, showing a profit for 2021 of $20bn and revenues of $79bn, all while paying a tax rate of 8.5 per cent. ®
Get our [19]Tech Resources
[1] https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2022-01/cp220016en.pdf
[2] https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-06/cp140082en.pdf
[3] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52009XC0922(02)&from=EN
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YfJ7W0YfApU7gCz7iNqTSAAAAAY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YfJ7W0YfApU7gCz7iNqTSAAAAAY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YfJ7W0YfApU7gCz7iNqTSAAAAAY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2012/07/03/intel_appeals_ec_fine/
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YfJ7W0YfApU7gCz7iNqTSAAAAAY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2014/06/12/intel_amd_ec_fine_stands/
[10] https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2017-09/cp170090en.pdf
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2021/11/10/google_shopping_ecj/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2020/08/25/ftc_qualcomm_appeal/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/22/intel_fab_promises/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/21/european_chips_act/
[15] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YfJ7W0YfApU7gCz7iNqTSAAAAAY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[16] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12008E102
[17] https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/eu-court-annuls-intels-2009-billion-euro-antitrust-82481167
[18] https://www.intc.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1522/intel-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2021-financial
[19] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Brown Envelopes?
Brown envelopes?
Seems about right.
Now wait for the tax breaks and other similar stimuli.
If and when any Intel fab is set up in the EU, the tax-payers will have paid for it twice over.
That's modern capitalism for you.
O.
Re: Brown Envelopes?
Socilism for corps.
I don't understand how the same court can say two opposite things. I also don't understand why it took 13 years to get this result, supposing the EC won't appeal.
The ECOJ, the EU's Supreme Court, told the lower court that the standards it applied were incorrect and it should reinterpret the case in the light of different ones. This is exactly how most appeals work in the US and UK, very few are directly ruled on, most that aren't fully affirmed are sent back for a corrected ruling.
I went crosseyed trying to read the long ruling the first time, but the general conclusion was that it looked good for Intel back then, so this is only surprising that it took so long.
... don't understand how the same court can say two opposite things.
Well ...
You first have to understand that money talks and (most) politicians listen .
Fortunately, there are still some deaf ones around, but it is just a minority.
Not to mention that those who listen have very acute hearing, especially sensitive to the voice of money's fundamental frequency.
ie: ~ 70 to 350 Hz.
Basically, it is just a question of talking loud and long enough.
O.
Whuff
> The ruling suggests that EU trustbusters won't be able to constrain corporate behavior if alleged misconduct fails to fit within the limited definition of competitive abuse under EU law
My initial reaction to this was: "well, HELL yeah, they can't just make shit up as they go along: the agreed powers/conditions are the agreed powers/conditions."
But then I looked at [1]the Treaty section's wording , and... it is in fact entirely open-ended. It formally specifies that they CAN just make shit up as they go along. The conditions' list is purely examples, listing up-front definite uses of a general wide power but not restricting that general wide power.
But then there's the weird "is it or isn't it" possible collapse of all authority unless the actions-of-interest explicitly create a problem with (only) inter-country transactions: " in so far as it may affect trade between Member States." -- is that supposed to be (a) a general wank flourish or (b) a scope definition? If (b), it implies 0 power for the EU in controlling market abuse in ~any normal situations.
But then there's the oddity that (assuming (a)) the Intel situation looks to be a simple case of list item (c): "(c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;"
What a schemozzle.
[1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12008E102
Re: Whuff
Guff like that is why the lawyers managed to get well over a decade of well paid activity.
Just to decide if this was either an anticompetitive blackmail/bribe or valid contractual terms.
Wrong article, I thought this was the one about the new chip factories in Europe
... and then, maybe it is.
How much?
After all of these years a complete non-result. Intel kept its $1.2bn and the lawyers all got paid handsomely. What a huge waste of time.
But wait, do I hear sound of breaking ground somewhere in the EU? It is! Oh, a new EU funded IC plant is being built for Intel. Who knew?
Justice is the same all over the world ..... if you have lots & lots of money !!!
Intel simply used the tried & tested method as used in the US of A.
(As used by Big Tech Companies, Trump Dynasty(!!??), Global Consultancies, Financial & Bankng Corporations etc etc)
Keep throwing money at the lawyers to make the case run on and on and on ..... until you have the result you want !!!
Nice to know that the EU follows the same universal rules :)
The EU in a nutshell
A glacial, decades long bureaucratic legal process resulting in something that's either unenforced or unenforceable. Chocolate teapot springs to mind.
But hey, at least thousands upon thousands of penpushers got to spunk the hard earned tax money of EU citizens up the wall, right?
Open banana courts
In most countries we are now seeing openly that courts are corrupt to the bone. The rule of the top 1% is being bestowed on us all.
There's nothing to be seen here. Put on your muzzle and go away!
Brown Envelopes?
Europe wants more chip manufacturing in Europe.
Europe throws out case against chip manufacturing company.