Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ali Chen who wrote (66165)	7/20/1999 12:04:00 AM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 1585499

Re: "Thanks for the explanation. So, these must be special packages and not those retail chips that generate revenue. Plus a special external hardware that AMD never fabricated. Therefore the ICE was actually never used in the marketplace and did no harm to Intel, right? Now it is clear to conclude that Intel resorted to this trick with a sole goal to achieve market dominance and become a monopoly. What a socially justifiable goal! " Yes you are correct that this feature was never used in normal commercial products. What is important to understand is how American Law works. If Intel does not defend it's microcode copyrights under any and all violations, they may lose those copyrights under all conditions. There was a case a few years ago when McDonalds sued a small insignificant fast food company called McDharmas for Trade Name violation. Not because McDonalds gave a sh*t about that small company but in this country if you allow anyone to misuse your Trade Name or Copyright you can lose all claim to it. Intel had to defend itself against AMD, even if the issue was minor because if they didn't, AMD could claim Intel gave up their rights by not defending a previous violation. That's the was American Law works. It sucks but that's the way it is. EP