Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Judge Gives Intel More Time To Find Missing E-mail

Posted by samzenpus on from the look-hard dept.

narramissic writes "ITworld is reporting that Intel has until April 17 (7 days more than the original deadline of April 10) to 'explain to a judge why it lost e-mail records that could provide proof that the chip maker used anticompetitive practices as alleged by Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD).' According to an order from Vincent Poppiti, the special master hearing negotiations of the case, the court is looking for an accounting of Intel's document preservation problems and a proposal for a better solution for archiving future records."

6 of 62 comments (clear)

  1. They could try the truth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... we can't find them because we deleted them.

  2. I call poppycock by Cervantes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This whole thing sounds like crap from Intel. "Whoops, your honour, we, a giant, multibillion dollar organization, staffed with the brightest engineering and IT minds that money can buy, accidentally forgot to keep email archives. TeeHee. No idea how that happened. Oh well, since there's no evidence of our transgressions thanks to this 'oopsie', we'll just go home now..."

    I mean, does anyone actually believe that they forgot to uncheck that annoying little box in Exchange labelled "Delete all incriminating emails after 30 days"? I could believe that a few emails got misplaced, even believe that one set of tapes was damaged or corrupted... but "the staff wasn't doing it, IT didn't think about it, and the system was automatically deleting them"?

    I think I may just keep buying AMD, mostly because I'm worried that Intel quality control is about the same as their IT competence, and I'll open up my new Core Duo to find a severed human finger in there.
    (but safely wrapped in a clean room suit).

    --
    If I knew the wedgies I gave you back in 6th grade would have resulted in this . . . I might have taken a moments pause.
  3. Never understood by pembo13 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    why people expect others to keep incriminating, or even non-incriminating emails

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    1. Re:Never understood by ZDRuX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I`m not a lawyer or anything but.. I think when you're a corporation of this size and so much influence, you're expected to keep records of everything that happens, and be publically responsible for any harm you do, should someone question your procedure in court.

      NOW! On a different note.. if you are going to be writing emails about how to screw over another company, why in the world would you do it in a tracable way? Why not meet over a lunch dinner, or maybe even do it over the phone?.. Bah, use an outside hotmail account if you really have to!

      --
      The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  4. Uh huh....sure.... by kcbrown · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FTFA:

    That process hit a snag when Intel said in March it had accidentally deleted many of those records, including e-mail written by its Chairman Craig Barrett and CEO Paul Ottelini.

    Yeah, sure. Email sent by the corporate executives accidentally deleted?

    People get their asses fired and sued for much less than that.

    The people responsible for the email of the executives don't do anything of the sort unless they're explicitly told to.

    So I think it's about as likely that the email messages in question got "accidentally" deleted as it is that the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was "accidentally" bombed.

    --
    Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
  5. Seen it all before by GFree · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This reminds me of politicians who have to testify at a hearing for whatever indecent they've managed to get themselves involved with.

    "Sorry, I have no memory of that event."
    "Sorry, I have no recollection of that phone call."
    "Sorry, I cannot recall that conversation."

    Unfortunately we're screwed either way. If they're lying, then they can't be trusted to run a country. If they're telling the truth, then they have shown an extraordinary inability to remember important details, they have chronic memory problems and as such they still can't be trusted to run a country.