Intel Pulls Out $1.25B to Settle All AMD Problems

[Guest]

Haha. It doesn't surprise me that Intel settled. Precedence would take effect since Intel already lost billions in EU, now that New York has filed along the same lines, Intel is set to lose in the end (financially). This does however admit guilt on Intel's part. Why else would they have settled with AMD? If it wasn't for AMD acquiring ATI I bet they probably would have filed bankruptcy and closed up shop not able to take years of such unfair practices along time ago.

 

[Gin Fushicho]

And finally its over. =)

 

[Atticah]

so all this means

Intel - Raises Prices
Amd - Lowers Prices

??????????

 

[lashton]

maybe the lawyer doesn't get any money, if AMD and Intel were mutually agreed

 

[DjEaZy]

... i just hope, that the croslicensing is just in the CPU department... because in the GPU segment intel haz nothing to offer... some intel GPU patents are licensed from nVidia... intel is stuck in i810 like tech with some improvements...

 

[ohim]

Intel still won , since they payed 1.27 bil for a period of 6 years when AMD was above Intel , so how many bilions did intel got in that period ? And like i said before it affected AMD in the long term too keep the company more competitive over time too. If AMD would have sold those Athlon 64 over P4 like it should maybe AMD would have had the founds to make a Core 2 Duo killer at it`s debute but with what founds? and so on.

 

[bigght]

Intel are finally paying for their sins, lol. As others have said, we need AMD to survive. Its the only way us consumers benefit. Intel's new ad campaign is proof that they have to shed their image as bullys.

 

[sonofliberty08]

1.25b to settle and get all the rights -__-
that's mean AMD can't do anything when intel copy it's fusion , hypertransport , multi core patterns , amd64 and others ......
intel knows it copy amd patterns more than amd copy its patterns nowadays .
and 1.2b is piece of cake for intel .

 

[randomizer]

Global Foundries are the winners here, not AMD.

 

[SlyMaelstrom]

Well... I guess all of the Intel folks should be saying "There goes my Bom Bom-Bom Bonus."

I just hope this doesn't effect the progress of Larrabee too much.

 

[bk420]

it's about time. Now Intel can crush amd legally.

 

[Ehsan w]

ok....so what happened?
Intel gave AMD money for what?
kinda confusing to me.....

 

[tester24]

[citation][nom]skora[/nom]Maybe this is from the Yes Men.How much of the 1.25b is left after AMD has to pay their lawyers?[/citation]

Usually in cases such as this you have lawyers working for you (not a private firm) so they dont get the usual 1/3 just normal salary, maybe a bonus.


That being said I am wondering how this patent rights will work. It doesn't say sharing of patents so who knows. Maybe the patents for todays technology will be extended.

Yes AMD can definately use this cash to pay back debt and also possibly hire some more talent to get their Bulldozer project going faster as well as balance the books. Personally it could have been more money, well I should say it SHOULD have been more money with interest and would have been if intel lost the trials.

As for copying technolgies I doubt intel will copy much of AMD technology. More like the opposite. However that's not a bad thing and I hope it will stir up more competition.

 

[ceteras]

[citation][nom]fazers_on_stun[/nom]Hmm, wonder what this does for the NY State AG Cuomo's antitrust investigation? If he has to drop it, would be a blow to his political aspirations .[/citation]
He can go on, but AMD might not cooperate much.

 

[tester24]

[citation][nom]nelson_nel[/nom]No. They still have to deal with the federal suits. I think there is one in the US and pretty sure there is an ongoing investigation in EU. The real question I think was AMD's testimony needed in any of those cases and if so, are they now barred from participating?[/citation]

Yes if subpoenad yes they would have to testify. However I am not sure on how much cooperation would be expected.

You would think because this isn't a civil issue that they would have to fully participate because the federal and civil court are two different systems.

 

[Guest]

"This does however admit guilt on Intel's part. Why else would they have settled with AMD?". It does not admit any guilt. The only thing it admits is that prolonged litigation is very expensive.

 

[NightLight]

Don't forget that it all started with an AMD lawsuit against intel back in the day to get the rights to keep cloning the 486 (1st gen) processor. I don't know how they did that exactly with the copyright being in place, but it all started to go wrong there. Their lawyers should have never let that one get away from them. The only plus side was that AMD / CYRIX / IBM kept INTEL's prices in check. But ask yourself: wouldn't you do the same? I think you'll think ...yes.

 

[antilycus]

doesn't AMD hold the Patent for 64-bit computing? Intel was paying AMD for its technology.

 

[randomizer]

[citation][nom]Antilycus[/nom]doesn't AMD hold the Patent for 64-bit computing? Intel was paying AMD for its technology.[/citation]
Incorrect. AMD only holds the IP for the x86-64 extensions, not 64-bit computing as a whole. Itanium existed before x86-64.

 

[Nexus52085]

[citation][nom]Honis[/nom]This wont stop "over" zealous prosecuting attorneys from charging Intel with Antitrust lawsuits. It's a win-win for AMD.[/citation]
I still pray that Intel gets a shit load more money taken away from them. AMD just took crumbs for food.

 

[Vermil]

This is a huge loss for AMD and all of us. Make no mistake about that. And the reason is cashflow. Intel has again managed to commit grave crimes and get off free, simply because they've pushed their victim so close to the edge that they don't have any choice. They've done this before with DEC. Proves yet again a sad thing. The only right to justice is money. I wonder what Intel paid the judges that have delayed and delayed this case?
AMD will be dead in a few years. And then you will have to get used to see half the price of a new computer being the CPU. And you will get used to see a heavily stratified CPU range, where features and performance above the commodity (~Atom) will cost exponentially much more.

 

[Vermil]

[citation][nom]Drag0nR1der[/nom]I think the clincher for AMD in this deal, isn't the money, its the agrrement from intel to drop their requirement that AMD produce the majority (or any) of their chips in-house. Which is THE most important part of the deal as it allows AMD to pursue the business model they have wanted to for a number of years now. I can't believe Tom's didn't even mention this! shocking.The new cross license deal is essentially renewing the old one, but with this one major omission from it.as said above Anandtech has an excellent article on this.[/citation]
I have to disagree. I don't think Anandtech's article was excellent. I think it painted a very rosy and false picture of what is essentially a huge defeat for AMD. AMD never wanted to go fabless. That's a lie. Fabless is suicide, slower suicide perhaps, competing in the field of the major processor of the world. What they wanted is >30% market share which would make own fab more viable.
And it really wasn't a problem for AMD. Intel broke the cross licencing agreement first, through a silly mistake by an Intel spokesperson. Doesn't matter, they still broke it. The agreement specifically states that all rights of the offender are immediately voided. So even if AMD's interpretion of the agreement would have been found wrong, they'd still have their back free. On the contrary, since Intel acted first, Intel would have been in trouble since every Core2 and Core iX CPU they've built since breaking the licence, rely on AMD patents which they no more have any valid negotiated rights to use.

 

[Vermil]

[citation][nom]trinix[/nom]I bet the fact that they now can continue to produce x86 chips is what really pushed them to take this deal, rather than the money. Sure 1.25B is nice, but what's a 5 year fight with no license to make cpus.If I'm not mistaken they had a lot of trouble lately with the license. Intel wanting to revoke it, not extent it or something like that. And if GF can now make their chips or any other company, AMD is going to be able to get better.AMD wins in this all, Intel doesn't lose as much as they could have if they had continued down the road of lawyers and judges.[/citation]
Nah, it's the money. Or, rather, the liquidity. That agreement was a cross-licencing agreement. That, Intel and AMD both depended on for building current CPUs. AMD dosn't need any Intel patents to build a CPU that runs Windows Vista-64, Windows7-64, Linux 64, and all modern software. The same is not true for Intel. Also, Intel actions possibly broke that agreement first, which specifically worded in the agreement itself voids any Intel rights. So AMD was hardly in a weak position regarding the renewal of their mutual cross-licencing agreement. So you are mistaken. AMD didn't have any problems with any licence. And if the agreement was found to have been voided, AMD would have retained all rights, even though they actually didn't need them.
As for the money,.. As Otellini himself hints, it's easy to see that Intel could have to pay $20 billion in the end. Not even that is the roof. It could even run much higher. Only reason AMD takes 1.2b now, is that their CPU activities won't survive to that day in court. Even if the company somehow manages to do so.
So it's definitely the money.

 

[astrodudepsu]

Looks like AMD just got themselves a reparations check. Don't spend it all in one place AMD.

 

[redraider89]

[citation][nom]skora[/nom]Maybe this is from the Yes Men.How much of the 1.25b is left after AMD has to pay their lawyers?[/citation]

I'm sure AMD is using corporate lawyers, lawyers who are working for the company so this will only be the AMD coporate lawyers earning their keep instead of "contract" lawyers trying to get a windfall out of this.