The European Commission has fined Intel $400 million (€376 million) for hindering competitors’ access to the market through naked restrictions between 2002 and 2007. The fine comes after a long-running antitrust court battle dating back to 2009 when the Commission initially fined Intel a record $1.13 billion for abuse of dominance.
While some of Intel’s actions, like hidden rebates, were dropped on appeal due to lack of evidence of harm, the Commission upheld that Intel paid PC manufacturers to delay or limit products using AMD processors.
Specifically, the Commission cited examples where Intel paid HP not to sell AMD-powered business PCs to small and medium businesses through direct channels from 2002-2005. It also paid Acer to delay the launch of an AMD-based notebook from late 2003 to early 2004. Intel also paid Lenovo to push back the launch of AMD notebooks by six months.
While it’s great that fines are being levied for these crimes, the problem is that the damage is already done and a fine won’t actually undo said damage. Of course, there’s no way to know exactly what the industry would’ve looked like had Intel not committed these crimes, but I feel like quite often these fines are more seen as a cost of doing business than as an actual detrimental punishment. It reminds me a lot of speeding tickets – they can be devastating to somebody of lower means, but to the upper classes they’re just the cost of driving a car and barely even register.
I’d be much more in favour for not just fining companies that violate antitrust, but also going after the people within those companies that enabled and advocated for such behaviour through massive personal fines and jail time. None of the people involved will feel even the slightest bit of sting from their actions, and will do it all over again next time they get the chance.
It’s like they just go back and fourth.
Fine, appeal, fine, appeal, fine… Sort of like the struggle between good and evil.
Nope. The EU is not the US and since 2019 you need something really extraordinary as reason for being allowed to appeal a third time.
“The Court of Justice adopts new rules on whether or not to allow appeals to
proceed in cases which have already been considered twice” – Court of Justice of the European Union, PRESS RELEASE No 53/19, Luxembourg, 30 April 2019
After the third appeal though, it gets trickier. If they manage to lobby enough sovereign countries in the union to nullify the EU ruling in their territory, the whole ruling gets scrapped or at least re-trialed.
The UK was famous for doing this alongside france when it came to fishing quotas.
There is also Dustball Rally (an unsanctioned rally done on open roads), where the participants don’t care about any fines simply because the cost of fielding a supercar for Dustball Rally is so much higher (the fines look like a minor fee in comparison).
It’s why non-monetary penalties such as the “points system” or even immediate suspension of the driver’s license are a thing (ever wondered why Dustball Rally hasn’t been done in Europe lately?)
For corporations, non-monetary penalties involve being forced to promote a competitor’s product (see: browser ballot screen) or involuntary breakup of the company. However, what non-monetary penalty could potentially be applied to Intel in this case? Serious question.
Finland does not have the same system for speeding.
“Lowest speeding ticket is 20% of monthly income! In Finland, speeding fines are calculated based on a driver’s income. The more a driver earns, the higher the fine will be. The minimum fine is €115, but it can be much higher for repeat offenders or for drivers who are caught speeding by a large margin.”
Anders Wiklöf got a speeding ticket of €121,000
“However, what non-monetary penalty could potentially be applied to Intel in this case?”
Hit them where it hurts the most. Guilty of anti-competitive behaviour? Give the competition a leg up. In this case, let AMD have 10 years of royalty-free access to any x86 technology Intel develops and a perpetual license to those technologies after the 10 years pass.
I wonder, if AMD is cited as a victim in this ruling is any share of this fine going to AMD?