Slashdot Mirror


Intel Attacks Qualcomm for Allegedly Stifling Competition (tomshardware.com)

In an official statement Thursday, Intel called out Qualcomm for allegedly continuing to pursue its use of patent lawsuits and threatening lawsuits against its own customers and competitors even as multiple antitrust agencies have found Qualcomm to be violating competition laws with these tactics. From a report: The statement from Steven Rodgers, Intel EVP and general counsel, said that despite Qualcomm being fined by multiple governments around the world over its abuse of patents against other companies, the company continues the same aggressive legal strategy against its partners and competitors. This, Intel said, will only lead to higher prices for consumers and less innovation.

According to Intel, Qualcomm's goal is not to vindicate its IP rights, but to drive competition out of the market completely. Intel pointed out that Qualcomm has been fined almost a billion dollars in China, $850 million in Korea, $1.2 billion in the European Union and $773 million in Taiwan over the company's anti-competitive practices. Intel also encouraged everyone to pay attention to FTC's lawsuit against Qualcomm in the United States. The FTC will begin its opening arguments in court on January 4. Intel, who is a competitor of Qualcomm in the wireless modem space, said that it hopes the actions taken by global authorities against Qualcomm will preserve competition in the 5G market.

40 comments

  1. So innovate, right morons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't like the way they do business? Stop doing business with them. That's why I'll never buy another Intel-anything, those fucking assholes don't listen or care. I'm glad they get a taste of themselves on Qualcomm's corporate dick.

  2. spiderman_pointing_spiderman_dot_jpg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    are you fucking kidding me? fucking intel is complaining about anti-competitive behaviour?

    Holy shit, they must really be circling the drain

    1. Re:spiderman_pointing_spiderman_dot_jpg by Hylandr · · Score: 1

      They are just pissed because they lost the patent lawsuit to Qualcomm

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    2. Re:spiderman_pointing_spiderman_dot_jpg by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Yup, this is the company whose motto is "only the paranoid survive", they practically wrote the book on crushing competitors via unethical means.

    3. Re:spiderman_pointing_spiderman_dot_jpg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Intel has historically been open to sharing technology. That's why AMD exists. That's why there have been many other manufacturers of x86 compatible CPUs (IBM, NEC, Texas Instruments, Cyrix, NexGen, VIA, IDT, Rise, Transmeta, STM, Fujitsu, OKI, Siemens, Intersil, C&T, UMC, etc.). If they were as anti-competitive as you falsely claim, then that would have never happened.

    4. Re:spiderman_pointing_spiderman_dot_jpg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you for get Intel actions against distributors, retailers & programmers that sold AMD & supported AMD? AMD exists by defeating Intel in courts.

  3. Remove all patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Remove all patents, let the market sort it out.

    1. Re:Remove all patents by xack · · Score: 1

      In a world where significant advances in Moore's law happens every 18 months, 20 years is far too long. Tech related patents need to be a lot shorter length. Imagine if Disney ran the patent office.

    2. Re:Remove all patents by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Imagine if Disney ran the patent office.

      All progress would have halted shortly after the wheel?

  4. Pot Kettle Black by bobstreo · · Score: 0

    They're just mad that Qualcomm is not following the trademarked process of EEE that Microsoft has used forever.

    1. Re:Pot Kettle Black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Intel literally paid OEM's to not offer AMD chips, and they still increase the amount of "reimbursements" they give to companies based on how many non-Intel chips they sell.

    2. Re:Pot Kettle Black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Intel literally paid OEM's to not offer AMD chips, and they still increase the amount of "reimbursements" they give to companies based on how many non-Intel chips they sell.

      What are you complaining about, silly?

      Volume discounts and rebates are standard business practices:

      Intel's rebate payments to Dell maxed out that fiscal quarter, February to April 2006, at $805 million...
       
      That figure represented 104% of Dell's net income for the quarter.

    3. Re:Pot Kettle Black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, anticompetitive behavior was (at the time) standard practice.

    4. Re:Pot Kettle Black by bobstreo · · Score: 1

      Well Intel literally paid OEM's to not offer AMD chips, and they still increase the amount of "reimbursements" they give to companies based on how many non-Intel chips they sell.

      What are you complaining about, silly?

      Volume discounts and rebates are standard business practices:

      Intel's rebate payments to Dell maxed out that fiscal quarter, February to April 2006, at $805 million...

      That figure represented 104% of Dell's net income for the quarter.

      LOL, TIL Dell is still "in business" I thought it went belly up years ago.

    5. Re:Pot Kettle Black by sjames · · Score: 1

      Not to mention rigging their compiler to add code to detect competing compatible CPUs and downgrade to the slowest code path. Proven by patching the detection code out and running the code flawlessly at much better performance on AMD processors.

    6. Re:Pot Kettle Black by sjames · · Score: 1

      Volume discounts and rebates are standard. Withholding them if someone also sells the competitor's product crosses the line.

  5. That's funny... by Mashiki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Very funny. Coming from the same company that has been hit repeatedly for anti-competitive behavior, price fixing, and anti-trust actions against a competitor(AMD) and lost every case.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
    1. Re: That's funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Let's not pretend either company has any moral high ground. All corporations are out to make as much money as possible, including options that have penalties or are illegal but result in higher net gains.

      That's capitalism folks, don't pretend you care about consumers. You only care about consumers when it increases your investors profit margins or your yearly bonus. All the PR work is simply strategy to gain a stronger market foothold. Switch the company's positions and it'll be nearly identical.

    2. Re:That's funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Years ago I had an Intel engineer admit to colluding with MicroSoft to slow down older systems to encourage people to buy new computers.

      He was giggling while telling me how they did it.

    3. Re: That's funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup, and we all believe you mr anonymous coward.

      Disclaimer: this totally legitimate post was sponsored AMD.

    4. Re:That's funny... by jimbo · · Score: 2

      But they're right, QC are complete assholes, like many large dominant companies, like Intel themselves have been for decades.

    5. Re:That's funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It takes one to know one ;-)

    6. Re:That's funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet APK has never charged you for his FREE software.

      Use his hosts file engine! Then you will be free from malware/Spectre and Meltdown/much much more!

      You know that the time is right for YOU to evangelize for APK. It is the right thing to do, and it sets you apart from the crowd.

      Join him today!

      ALL HAIL APK

    7. Re:That's funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      APK is too busy eating paste to code anything.

    8. Re: That's funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's *crony* capitalism, not all forms of capitalism.

  6. Remember Intel Inside? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pepperidge farm remembers.

  7. Checks out by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Very funny. Coming from the same company that has been hit repeatedly for anti-competitive behavior,

    On the other hand, it does fit perfectly with the "takes one to know one" theory...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Checks out by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, it does fit perfectly with the "takes one to know one" theory...

      Or the old 'every center of power creates it's own monster that fuels it's demise' to paraphrase.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:Checks out by postbigbang · · Score: 1

      And no narcissistic corporation has a heart or soul. Wintel is now LoseTel because they couldn't tell that their oil well in the basement would start to run dry with ARM, SoCs, and good RF designs. Now their competitor is QC, but also Softbank.

      Intel: There are no tears for you, and your PR line is BS and sounds plainly stupid coming from the ex-king of CPU monopolies.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  8. Unicode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As always, it's not a criminal act to clean up trash unicode characters if your system doesn't properly support them.

  9. Intel: NSA's Asscovering Traitors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If anyone would know about shady cirporate shit its the guys who created an on-chip OS for the NSA to spy on the entire world.

    FUCK INTEL.
    THEY OWE US MONEY.

  10. Re: by kurkosdr · · Score: 1

    Sayeth the holder of essential patents for the defacto standard called "x86", a standard which is important for the little niche called "Almost all Desktop and laptops"

  11. Come on Intel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    get in the lab and do some research. Stop being apples lapdog.

  12. Like a Burglar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is like a burglar suing me for locking my doors, preventing him stealing my stuff.

  13. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    x86 isn't such a big deal anymore. Much of the world has moved on from it, especially now that phones and tablets are getting so . . . well . . .fast. Check out benchmarks of Apple's A12x to see how far ARM has come in the world.

    Qualcomm is already knocking on Intel's door by partnering with Microsoft to bring their Snapdragon CPUs to laptops, running an ARM version of Win10. They already have lappies with the Snapdragon 850 out there, and once the Snapdragon 8180 hits it could get really . . . interesting.

    Intel's complaint officially pertains to modems. Qualcomm has some of the best, if not THE best, cellular modems out there, and some companies like Apple desperately don't want to be beholden to Qualcomm forever. Which is why Apple second-sourced modems from Intel from previous gen phones and will use only Intel modems for current-gen phones (Apple may take their modems in-house in the future). But there is more going on underneath the surface than just modems. Qualcomm is slowing encroaching on Intel's territory, and seriously considered attacking the server room a year ago with an ARM server chip (which they have since abandoned - for now). Intel is struggling with their 10nm node while Qualcomm is happily fabbing away on nodes that are denser and more-performant than Intel's 14nm node. Ditto for Huawei, Samsung, and Apple. All of them could bring ARM products to the table that could erode Intel's marketshare. Intel is trying to escape to the HPC/AI deep learning space. It'll be interesting to see how much market share they cede to ARM in the process.

  14. Pot meet kettle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *grabs popcorn

  15. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Intel announces it's upcoming architecture Blacky Pot.

  16. Karma bites back? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess outside of x86 Intel is not that good.

  17. AMD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Intel was FINE with cheating the competition when Intel was doing it to AMD. But now that Intel is losing the mobile space, suddenly Intel has this fake outrage over Qualcomm.

    Sounds a lot like Microsoft attacking Google over allegedly hurting Youtube performance on non-Chrome browsers.