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.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: inex who wrote (166034)	7/18/2005 3:19:10 PM
From: Elmer Phud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

inex AMD will then be able to take the results of this litigation into its U.S. case and be able to say that Intel was found guilty even after Intel tried to defend itself... AMD's suit in the US is in a US Court and subject to US Law, not Japanese. If Intel's actions in Japan were to be ruled illegal by a Japanese Court that doesn't mean that those actions are illegal under US Law. At least that's my take on it. I am no legal expert but I did stay at a Holiday Inn once.

To: inex who wrote (166034)	7/18/2005 6:39:19 PM
From: TGPTNDR	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

inex, Re: My understanding in AMD's lawsuit is that, like most civil suits, there only has to be overwhelming evidence of Intel's actions.> That's one of the interesting points of law -- as I understand it -- WRT Monopoly law. The burden of proof seems to be shifted to the defendant to a much greater degree in Monopoly cases... And the drive to not be labled as a Monopoly is great. Intel will drag this process out as long as it can but the settlement will be out of court and not public. (Though some $ figures will be flashed around.) -tgp