Samsung To Pay Out $300 Million In Anti-Trust Suit

infernalC writes "Reuters is reporting that Samsung has agreed to plea guilty to charges of price fixing in the memory market in a $300 million settlement." From the article: " Samsung would become the third chip maker to plead guilty in the wide-ranging probe of the prices of dynamic random access memory, or DRAM, chips. The Justice Department has blamed the price-fixing conspiracy for driving up the price of chips used in products ranging from personal computers and servers to cell phones, cameras and game consoles."

Comments

And How Does This Help Me?

[Nom du Keyboard]

Samsung has agreed to plea guilty to charges of price fixing in the memory market in a $300 million settlement

This may enrich the justice department, computer companies, and/or their shareholders, but how does it help me?

Re:And How Does This Help Me?

[nurb432]

IT wasnt designed to help you, dear consumer. You have been screwed, and you must learn to accept that.

The government gets the extra cash, and of course the lawyers.

We the consumers, almost never get a break after its proven we overpaid.

I bet prices wont even drop after this, 'due to inflation'.

Re:And How Does This Help Me?

[kilgortrout]

I know this is slashdot and no one reads the article but really. This was a criminal prosecution for price fixing brought by the US Dept of Justice and I can assure you those government attorneys will be getting their usual monthly slalary. The $300 million metioned in the article is a criminal fine to be paid to the government.
And for the other legal retards out there, criminal fines are not normally divied up among members of the community; it goes into the treasury.

$300M?

[geomon]

I always wonder how much these fines really hurt mega-corps. If they were able to control prices so effectively that they were accused of price-fixing, then the potential profits from that enterprise would be in the billions.

Seems like these fines are just the cost of doing business. I'm sure that $300M is a lot less than their manufacturing charges, or even their advertising expenses.

Do we get any of our money back?

[SeanDuggan]

I guess the question is, do those of us who have bought memory during this time get money back? My first impression would be no, as this is a criminal suit, not a civil suit. *shrug* If that's the case, I'm sure there will be some opportunistic^K altruistic lawyer who will file one on our behalf for a substantial legal fee^K^K^K^K^K pro bono.

So...

[steveo777]

Does this mean Apple is off the hook in Korea? Or are they twice as screwed because they got "fair" prices?

Doesn't matter.....

[8127972]

...... cause I can't afford the price of gas so that I can drive to the computer store to buy that "affordable" RAM.

what about

[Rac3r5]

what about those oil and medical companies that drive the prices on the smallest pretext

The Real Question...

[caenorhabditas]

The real question here seems to be, "Will Samsung actually change their practices?" In many high-profile anti-trust cases, it seems that the government will fine the company involved, but then the company goes back to the same old tactics of price fixing and other monopolistic behavior. How does the DOJ propose to prevent Samsung from illegal tactics in the future?

Fines and Penalties

[SeanDuggan]

Well, in theory, it's supposed to discourage them because fines will continue and increase if they continue such a practice. However, the companies are always able to switch to the next shady business practice.

Re:Fines and Penalties

[geomon]

However, the companies are always able to switch to the next shady business practice.

And they do so without admitting guilt.

I wish I could break laws and not admit guilt.

I guess we should all become corporations. That way we could just disincorporate and reincorporate under a different name.

Beats going to jail.

Cue the libertarian economists

[Marxist Hacker 42]

Who will tell us all how regulation will never solve anything and how the government is evil for trying to break up this scam based on their own outlandish economic theories.

Of course, from my way of thinking, $300 million, or even $485 million if you count the fine against the other chip manufacturer fined so far, is probably just a drop in the bucket compared to the money earned by this scheme. We're lucky to have a regulated economy where the government can do *something* about this at least- but if you think this is going to make those who like money more than people stop trying to destroy the free market, then I've got a bridge or six in Portland to sell you....

Re:Cue the libertarian economists

[dada21]

There isn't easy empirical evidence or equations to be had.

The Austrians (Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Rockwell) point to the fact that money is a commodity affected by supply and demand and that prices are as well.

When you involve a million regulations, tariffs, taxes and fees, it is very difficult to scientifically attribute prices to reality. Fox example, gas. The price of gas is affected by too many government mandates to set an equation to. Mandated blends, refinery monopoly, distribution restrictions, price controls, etc. Did you know we sell our oil to Iraq for pennies a gallon? Government gas needs also raise prices by reducing supply.

In a free and unregulated market, the best quality and best price occur from billions of consumers making unique choices.

Economics to me is philosophical today. How else can you account for nearly every American putting faith in legal counterfeiting (inflation) and legal bubble-building (artificially low interest rates and artificially high loan acceptance due to FNMA)?

Don't read Mises for junk science, read Mises to better understand those you put in public office.

Micron Tech organized the price fixing, then ...

[rlglende]

I believe the story here is that Micron Technology organized the price fixing ring, then informed the government(s), thereby obtaining immunity.

This is an interesting strategy for handling competition, but dont' fool yourselves that it means lower prices for anyone.

Lew

increased RAM prices to help Rambus out?

[dueydotnet]

Just did a little bit of searching when I read the article. According to wikipedia, the first motherboards with Rambus were in 1999, and Intel had an agreement with Rambus to use their RAM until 2002. These are the same years quoted in the article. I wonder if there are other players in this game other than Samsung?

How much!

[squoozer]

What I would like to know is how much money it is estimated they made from price fixing. While $300 million is a lot of money I can't help feeling that they made a lot more than that and therefore over all they have still made a profit. Personally, I think these companies should be fined to the point where they are all but bankrupt. After all it's not like they did it by accident. Perhaps makign the directors personally liable would be another route to take. The threat of a couple of year behind bars would probably make them care about shady practices.

Wonderful!

[medeii]

Now, can we do something about the other industry cartels?

So who thinks?

[olddotter]

So who thinks they are guilty of selling memory too cheaply to Apple?

Buy those Nanos while Apple is still getting a good deal on memory. :-)

that fine is a pittance for them.

[MMHere]

According to Samsung's 2004 annual report, a $300M fine is pretty much a slap on the corporate wrist for them:

2004 revenue was just under $122 BILLION, with net income of $11.8 BILLION.

So the fine is 2.5% of one year's net income, 0.25% of one year's revenue, and a mere 0.14% of their total assets.

This is incentive against cheating in future? How??