This is gonna leave a mark: Intel was just handed a $25 million slap on the wrist due to its questionable kickbacks to Korean computer manufacturers. The Korea Fair Trade Commission dropped the fine as punishment for the rebates Intel slipped to Samsung and Trigem in order to remain exclusive to its chips. Intel dolled out about $37 million in rebates -- under the guise of co-marketing campaigns -- over 2.5 years. While it is unclear whether or not Intel forced the manufacturers into any exclusive arrangement, it seems the commission believes such a clause was implied. Meanwhile, Intel is
already under the European Union's microscope for the
same practices. Intel plans to appeal the ruling, and adds, "We'll never do something that violates Korean law. We don't believe we have ever done that." While such practices remain under the legal radar here in the States, this practice isn't so kosher elsewhere.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
angel @ Jun 5th 2008 9:13AM
Which company in the world doesnt do this!
tekdroid @ Jun 5th 2008 9:18AM
the ones without enough money to afford it.
=)
coolblue @ Jun 5th 2008 9:23AM
All the companies that are not Giant Multinational organisations and as it is illegal in most of the world (and rightly so), many stear clear of this practice (or make better efforts to cover it up).
tom @ Jun 5th 2008 12:02PM
I wonder how will AMD celebrate this?
1. Throw a party?
2. Cutting a cake with Intel C2D?
dan2600 @ Jun 5th 2008 9:21AM
First the American beef farce...now this? Wow, the Korean government really knows how to deal with international trade *sarcasm*
As Angel just said, every company does this, and It makes no sense to "punish" them for it, that is, unless you want one of THE BIGGEST semiconductor giants in the world to do less business in your country, then again Korean's GDP doesn't really make a difference to me.
coolblue @ Jun 5th 2008 9:28AM
Of course it makes sense to punish them. It is massively anti-consumer and stops smaller companies from being able to compete on an equal stage. Intel are basically forcing consumers to buy intel chips (albeit embedded in consumer electronics).
ReggieXuk @ Jun 5th 2008 9:55AM
dan2600, you scumbag!
kicks @ Jun 5th 2008 12:24PM
wait... what??
for your information, actually, the 'beef farce' was caused by something we call netizens of korea. and by the way they got all the rights to protest about it. but thats another story.
and who said the korean government 'punished' them? the fair trade commission did.
and finally, i don't know about you, but i do not let my national pride cause me to say anything racist against anybody.
p.s. i read that apple ipod is 70% samsung so maybe the korean GDP decrease may make a difference to you.
dj-kenpo @ Jun 5th 2008 9:38AM
wow, dan, you're a dumbass. where would I even begin?
Chris @ Jun 5th 2008 9:43AM
Agree on dan being a dumbass. South Korea is to be commended for showing that they value fair competition.
kal326 @ Jun 5th 2008 9:40AM
"This is gonna leave a mark:", really? A 25 million fine because they gave out 37 million in rebates. I pretty sure if they basically gave away 37 million, 25 is a drop in the bucket to Item.
Bakari @ Jun 5th 2008 9:52AM
Just because "every other" company in the world does it, does not make it ethical. Furthermore, Korea manufactures a crapload of consumer electronics. Intel straightening up and flying right could drop prices for everyone through increased competition.
They killed AMD like Microsoft killed Apple.
Brandon @ Jun 5th 2008 10:06AM
I didn't know my lovely iPhone and MBA were manufactured by bunch of zombies!
Charles Han @ Jun 5th 2008 12:03PM
yea apparently, its an epidemic
thassell @ Jun 5th 2008 10:03AM
@Bakari: Really, I thought AMD ruined themselves for making what is being considered one of the most foolish business decisions fo all times by buying ATI, not to mention the fact they stopped innovating. AMD was doing just fine while they were making a better product, but for some strange reason they stopped doing so. How is that Intel's fault?
You do realize that these lawsuits against Intel are for actions that took place between the late 90's through 2006, right?
David @ Jun 5th 2008 10:11AM
AMD didn't stop making the right chips, intel just moved the game on, and I don't see how buying ATI has ruined them.
AMD's problem was that even when they were making superior chips they didn't take massive shae from intel. why? intel's brand strength AND uncompetitive behaviour such as this.
Dubb @ Jun 5th 2008 10:30AM
@thassell
You've got to be kidding me. AMD stopped innovating? You can't innovate when your competitor is doing sleezy things like this to steal market share. This takes money from AMD directly, having a direct effect on their R&D department.
How is this NOT Intel's fault? Or maybe you think AMD should have been just as sleezy and started bribing top manufacturers for exclusivity? Is that your idea of innovation? Because that's not my idea of innovation.
Oinquer @ Jun 5th 2008 10:14AM
Take that Appl....
Oops..wrong thread...
It makes me wanna smile from one ear to the other, when i see them getting this fines =D
first MS now Intel...now my year is done, maybe Asus for making the EEE so damn expensive....
kicks @ Jun 5th 2008 11:56AM
i'm quite sure apple uses intel chips now days as well... if thats what you're getting at...
Forrest @ Jun 5th 2008 10:35AM
Weird...Autodesk does this kind of thing with its resellers. Each reseller has a quota to reach, and if they reach that quota the receive 'bonuses'. These quotas are set sky-high, and in many cases a reseller must focus most if not all of its efforts on selling software to reach those targets.
Nothing forces the reseller to do this - they just make significantly more money if they hit those targets set by Autodesk. If Intel provides bonuses to companies that ship X number of units with their products, how is that different? If 'X' is at or higher than the total number of units they ship, then yeah, every device is going out with Intel goods.
Hell, even if there WAS an exclusive arrangement, how is that different from me not being able to get Diet Coke at a restaurant because they serve only Pepsi products? That's the REAL crime in the business world these days IMO. No, Diet Pepsi is NOT the same as Diet Coke. Diet Pepsi fucking sucks.
Oinquer @ Jun 5th 2008 12:30PM
Diet coke sucks too...
Gman @ Jun 5th 2008 12:26PM
"The Korea Fair Trade Commission dropped the fine as punishment..."
This sentence is quite misleading. Maybe use "issued" next time?
Kevin Moore @ Jun 5th 2008 1:05PM
The question is,... did Intel "force" Samsung and dem... into an exclusive agreement or did Samsung and dem.... bribe intel into "staying"
exclusive... if the later is true, there should sanctions by the Korean Authorities...
Jimmy Jones @ Jun 5th 2008 2:57PM
Time to cough out some benjamins from those sale of Atom sleeky processors.....huh
err..which company doesn't get sued these days?
Daniel @ Jun 5th 2008 3:04PM
like samung has not done worst. I would not pay a single peny of this if i were intel. hey but look on the birhgt side at least there not bribing the government.