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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Francis Chow who wrote (58623)	6/24/1998 6:06:00 PM
From: Dale J.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

I know something about the law... That's just what the DOJ said before they lost. Seriously though, I think it does have significance to Intel. Each case is decided on its own merits, that is true. But there are similarities between the two. MSFT was accused of violating the consent decree when they integrated the browser. The DOJ contended that MSFT used its OS to lock out competition by integrating the browser. MSFT contended it was just innovating and the integration had advantages to the consumer. The FTC has considered expanding the case against Intel. The FTC contends the P6 bus was designed to lock out the competition. Intel has stated the P6 bus has numerous technical advantages that result in a better system for the consumer. Now without getting to bogged down in the many details, just look at what the Appeals Court stated: The Court also observed that, ''[T]he limited competence of courts to evaluate high-tech product designs and the high cost of error should make them wary of second-guessing the claimed benefits of a particular design decision.'' Therefore, it concluded that courts should avoid trying to balance the potential benefits and costs associated with a particular product design feature, but rather should focus merely on ''whether there is a plausible claim that it brings some advantage.'' I'm just saying the FTC would be wise to read that ruling before expanding the case against Intel. But then again who says the FTC is wise. When it comes to the folks in Washington, there are many agendas that take precedence over the facts. Dale