News Article
Intel agrees to JFTC's demands but denies wrong doing
Number one chip maker Intel has announced that its Japanese subsidiary will comply with demands by the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) to stop using unfair sales practices to cajole PC makers into using only its microprocessors.
Number one chip maker Intel has announced that its Japanese subsidiary will comply with demands by the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) to stop using unfair sales practices to cajole PC makers into using only its microprocessors.
However, in a written statement, the company has reiterated its earlier assertion that it has done nothing wrong, claiming that its business practices are "both fair and lawful". JFTC had accused the company of violating Section 3 of Japan's Antimonopoly Act.
Intel also said that the cease and desist order from the JFTC would not "impair it from continuing to meet customer requirements".
Bruce Sewell, vice president and general counsel for Intel, said: "Intel respectfully disagrees with the allegations, but in order to continue to focus on the needs of customers and consumers, and continue to provide them with the best products and service, we have decided to accept the [JFTCs] recommendation."
"We believe the allegations misinterpret important aspects of our business practices and fail to take into account the competitive environment within which Intel and its customers compete."
Intels fierce rival AMD issued its own press statement in response to Intels, accusing its competitor of failing to accept responsibility for its actions.
"It is unfortunate that even when presented with specific - and very disturbing - findings of deliberate and systematic anti-competitive behaviour, Intel refuses to face the facts and admit the harm it has caused to competitors and consumers," said Thomas McCoy, AMD executive vice president, legal affairs and chief administrative officer.
"Although Intel's willingness to comply with the JFTC is a step in the right direction, it has conspicuously failed to either accept responsibility for its actions or acknowledge that competition is best served when customers and consumers have a choice.
"The JFTC determined that Intel conditioned its pricing based on customers not doing business with competitors; governments around the world must ensure that such anti-competitive actions are not impacting their markets as well."
AMD claims that its – and a much smaller companys – share of the Japanese microprocessor market fell from 24% in 2002 to 11% in 2003 as a direct result of Intels selling practices.
In agreeing to comply with the JFTCs demands, Intel must now end the use of rebates and other funds to impose conditions that prevent Japanese computer makers from using competitors' CPUs.
The company must also inform customers and its staff that such methods can no longer be used in the Japanese market.
The European Commission recently stated that it is investigating Intel for possible similar anti-competitive business practices in Europe and is cooperating with the Japanese authorities.
However, in a written statement, the company has reiterated its earlier assertion that it has done nothing wrong, claiming that its business practices are "both fair and lawful". JFTC had accused the company of violating Section 3 of Japan's Antimonopoly Act.
Intel also said that the cease and desist order from the JFTC would not "impair it from continuing to meet customer requirements".
Bruce Sewell, vice president and general counsel for Intel, said: "Intel respectfully disagrees with the allegations, but in order to continue to focus on the needs of customers and consumers, and continue to provide them with the best products and service, we have decided to accept the [JFTCs] recommendation."
"We believe the allegations misinterpret important aspects of our business practices and fail to take into account the competitive environment within which Intel and its customers compete."
Intels fierce rival AMD issued its own press statement in response to Intels, accusing its competitor of failing to accept responsibility for its actions.
"It is unfortunate that even when presented with specific - and very disturbing - findings of deliberate and systematic anti-competitive behaviour, Intel refuses to face the facts and admit the harm it has caused to competitors and consumers," said Thomas McCoy, AMD executive vice president, legal affairs and chief administrative officer.
"Although Intel's willingness to comply with the JFTC is a step in the right direction, it has conspicuously failed to either accept responsibility for its actions or acknowledge that competition is best served when customers and consumers have a choice.
"The JFTC determined that Intel conditioned its pricing based on customers not doing business with competitors; governments around the world must ensure that such anti-competitive actions are not impacting their markets as well."
AMD claims that its – and a much smaller companys – share of the Japanese microprocessor market fell from 24% in 2002 to 11% in 2003 as a direct result of Intels selling practices.
In agreeing to comply with the JFTCs demands, Intel must now end the use of rebates and other funds to impose conditions that prevent Japanese computer makers from using competitors' CPUs.
The company must also inform customers and its staff that such methods can no longer be used in the Japanese market.
The European Commission recently stated that it is investigating Intel for possible similar anti-competitive business practices in Europe and is cooperating with the Japanese authorities.
