Infineon To Pay $160 Million For Fixing RAM Prices

Jerrod K writes "Infineon Technologies pleaded guilty to charges of price fixing in an international conspiracy. The Justice Department said this is the third largest antitrust settlement ever. Other memory chip makers involved include Hynix, Samsung, and Micron Technology." Reader phalse phace adds a link to CNET's coverage.

Comments

Sweet.

[rincebrain]

Does that mean I can upgrade my RAM for less than the cost of a new processor now?

I mean, seriously. The prices were ludicrous for high-end manufacturers, and the low-end can sometimes die, and you have no recourse.

Huzzah!

Re:Sweet.

[LionMage]

I recognize that the RAM is, if not the, then one of the most intricate and cost-intensive parts to produce and to purchase.

Well, I can't speak to the cost-intensive part of your assertion, since I am not privy to some details about the economics of chip production. But intricate? Not hardly. DRAM and SRAM chips are laid out mostly in a grid, with very little real-estate set aside for control logic. The only complexity is the control logic; the rest of the chip is just a matrix of transistors (and, in the case of DRAM, one capacitor per transistor to actually store the bit).

RAM chips are pretty easy to design and lay out because of the inherent regularity in their structure.

The $160 million dollar tax question...

[garcia]

The real question is do they get to give away a bunch of 256k chips to schools as a tax credit?

Re:The $160 million dollar tax question...

[Martin Blank]

It's a fine, not a settlement. They're expected to cut a check for the amount to the government, not reimburse consumers.

Odd Concept

[Timber_Z]

I recall that things got pretty bad for awhile, but I still have a hard time with the concept of price fixing, when I clearly remember paying $150 for 8MB of ram, and how good of a deal that was.

Now thats fair.

[DAldredge]

A local family man is facing 20+ years in prision for walking into the vault at the back where he worked and taking 100,000 USD.

Why do large corps get away with crap like this, hell the goverment doesn't even go after those whitecollar criminals that skip bail...

But, normal crimes they come down hard on.

Re:Now thats fair.

[lothar97]

What's even more aggrevating is that these companies, once they pay for the mistakes in some manner (such as a fine), they are free to function as if nothing went wrong.

A perfect example is MCI/Worldcom. After imploding under massive amounts of fraud, screwing tons of people out of investments, employment, 401ks, etc, the company gets to "re-organize," pay a fine, then get government contracts. I bet if I'm punished for fraud, I would be shunned for life in any type of business setting.

This corporate crime problem will continue as long as it can be solved by fines, admitting no wrongdoing, and the limited minor punishments for those involved. I imagine if we held these people personally liable for all damage, put the company under 5-10 years probation, and made sure large jail sentances were required, we'd see a lot less of this trickery.

Then again, we don't want to hurt the innocent employess, and we don't want excessive government regulation.

Re:Now thats fair.

[Daniel]

My dictionary (written circa 1911) says:

CORPORATION, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility.

Does that answer the question?

Daniel

Re:Now thats fair.

[killjoe]

"Then again, we don't want to hurt the innocent employess, and we don't want excessive government regulation."

Punishing the guilty should not be seen as excessive govt regulation. The solution is simple. Dissolve the corporation and confiscate all the assets.

It's imperitive that the shareholders get screwed in the worse possible way possible. It was their job to make sure their company was run responsibly and it's their fault that the company committed crimes.

Once the assets get liquidated the money should be given as severence pay to all the employees starting at the bottom and working your way to the top until the money runs out.

Free market isn't perfect

[revscat]

Cases like this remind me why I don't think the libertarian philosophy towards free markets is all that realistic. Many libertarians believe that things such as this should be left to the marketplace to settle, and that government "interference" like this ultimately harms the market. I emphatically disagree. There are inherent flaws with the free market that the justice system can and should remedy so that the overall market is healthier thereby. Collusion does no one -- consumers, industries, or the economy as a whole -- any favors, and I fail to see how letting the market handle it would do anything but unfairly fatten the pockets of those who benefit.

Re:Free market isn't perfect

[Jahf]

You're right in the "many libertarians" statement, but that doesn't mean it is a clear majority. Unfortunately for Libs (like me) there are really 2 Lib groups within the party. Right/Conservative and Left/Liberal.

The Liberal side would be more in favor of government taking care of business like this but trying for the most part to stay out of other places like social laws (most especially privacy). The Conservative side is more set on seeing government stay out of business entirely as well as the social aspects.

I'm primarily a Libertarian Left because I'm more moderate on business than a Democrat, but far more liberal on social issues than a Republican, and I think both parties have sold out when it comes to privacy. However in this case I think the matter was solved properly.

Re:And just how do I benefit?

[xsupergr0verx]

Maybe it's like the RIAA settlement.

Each lawyer gets a new yacht, and we get a check for $4 in the mail.

My Head Just Exploded

[mattgarnsey]

From the article (condensed for brevity):

Infineon Technologies announced today that it has plead guilty to a single and limited charge related to the violation of US antitrust laws in connection with the pricing in its Dynamic Random Access Memory.

Infineon strongly condemns any attempt to fix or stabilize prices. Infineon is committed to vigorous and fair competition based solely on superior products and services.

It really shocks other libertarians when....

[ShatteredDream]

People like myself, who are more classical liberals than libertarians, apply Lord Acton's famous expression "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" to economics. The more wealth that is centralized in faceless organizations, the more power they have. Yet, the wealth is not to be measured in just how much cash they have, but by the position they enjoy which can be worth more than their bank accounts.

Anti-trust laws are nothing more than a way to provide a check on corporate power. They exist to keep companies, especially big corporations, from becoming in Locke's words "a law unto themselves."

Anyone who calls themself a libertarian, opposes antitrust laws and has a sympathetic view of the south in the civil war would do well to read some of the founders of the CSA's opinions on monied corporations. The short summary is that they considered them to be a plague on basic liberties and the free market and were fighting more against the corporations who saught the tariff which taxed the southern economy terribly and used the money to line the pockets of corporations, than it was for "states' rights." The major state's right was to "be free from being sucked dry by monied corporations."

I will say this about monopolies. The government creates many of these headaches that it has to later solve by having expansive IP laws which allow patent holders to rape and pillage innovators. Would someone please tell me why we can patent online shopping carts and file formats? How about business processes in general? What about things we have never even fully or at all implemented ourselves?

If the government were to be reconstituted on classical liberal values, most of these monopolies would die like vampires in the morning sunlight.

Re:Does this mean memory prices will fall?

[mr_spatula]

Sure. Just like CD prices fell after the CD price fixing settlemet... oh, wait...

Then I guess this will be like my rates with progressive going lower after they had the class action law suit over adjusting rates based on credit... oh, wait... that didn't happen either.

The only peopel to benefit from this will be the lawyers and the major companies - the rest of us will be lucky to get a coupon for a dollar off.

Big cartel, this one? Pffft.

[SenorCitizen]

If you want a *big* international anti-trust case, just try sueing OPEC.

How are they any different?

Re:And just how do I benefit?

[geeklawyer]

Each lawyer gets a new yacht, and we get a check for $4 in the mail.

I must be missing the joke. Why is it bad I get a yacht?