Dale Re..The courts actually ruled more or less in Intel's favor, stating that AMD did not meet their contractual obligations. However, they also ruled that Intel had dealt in bad faith by not accepting AMD's designs, and thus granted AMD the right to produce 386 and derivative processors. <<<
About a yr and a half ago, the other AMD thread discussed this and at that time one of the menbers posted the final court agreement summary. The court did rule that AMD and Intel had an agreement to produce X86 processors, and did rule that the main reason Intel rejected AMD's design for the chip, ( I believe PE said the chip was for running a monitor.) was to abrogate the agreement, not because the chip didn't meet the design and the contracts requirements. Thus Intel couldn't abrogate the agreement for that reason. However the judge also ruled that the agreement wasn't good enough, (after all it was mostly a gentlemans agreement) and that AMD should have done more during the lawsuit, which took a long time, to bring out their own designs; and therefore didn't award much in damages. In the end, while AMd won the lawsuit, Intel actually won, because Intel won the right to terminate the agreement,(Intel purposely didn't give the pentium a x86 name, so AMd could claim rights to copy it.)and didn't award AMD damages. |
