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 (259497)	4/6/2009 2:47:32 PM
From: fastpathguru	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

It's a definitive source, Elmer. The Court is the definitive source. Not your interpretation. They will decide, not you. Yes, the courts will decide, and the DOJ will decide what to prosecute on the government's behalf. I'm just presenting the USDOJ's stated opinion, not "deciding." Why is it so hard to understand that competitors, like consumers, can be harmed by abusive monopolies and deserve protection from monopolies that would try to shut off free access to the market? Nice try but that's not the disagreement. We are talking about AMD's claim that Intel is an abusive monopoly and their attempt to prove their accusation. AMD claims that both they and consumers have been harmed by abuses of the competitive process by Intel. Right? What about the cases where competition... I'm not elevating the importance of protecting competition over protecting consumers. All I'm saying is what the USDOJ says: Antitrust laws protect the process of competition, which benefits consumers by providing an optimal market, and benefits businesses by providing access to a level playing field. AMD claims that Intel tipped the playing field, harming them and consumers via specific abusive acts. I really don't care if you believe it or not; I only have a problem with you constantly misrepresenting the situation. fpg