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: Elmer Phud who wrote (253060)	6/8/2008 11:14:36 PM
From: wbmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Re: An appeal would send the matter to South Korea's court system, where the case would start from scratch. "We will get an opportunity in court to call witnesses and present evidence, things that we were not permitted to do at the KFTC" Sewell said. It says a lot that Intel is fighting this. They could have paid the $25M (which would have amounted to mice nuts for them) and be done with it. Instead, they are eager to fight on principle. Fortunately, it sounds like the Korean courts have a much more level playing field than their trade commission. Intel may end having to do the same thing with the EU. It could take years, but it seems worth it to have a definitive ruling on the fair usage of rebates, as it could set a very important precedent.

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (253060)	6/9/2008 6:46:42 AM
From: Dan3	Respond to of 275872

Re: An appeal would send the matter to South Korea's court system I think I see. They weren't convicted, they were exonerated and fined. They're appealing that win in the hopes of being convicted, instead? Thanks for clearing that up...