News Article
Intel and AMD trade blows
Intel has let AMD know they do not believe their cross licence agreement automatically transfers to the newly established Abu Dhabi funded Global Foundries but AMD retaliates that Intel is trying to distract from its antitrust suits.
At the start of this week Intel Corporation disclosed that the company has notified Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) that it believes AMD has breached a 2001 patent cross-license agreement with Intel. Intel believes that Global Foundries is not a subsidiary under terms of the agreement and is therefore not licensed under the 2001 patent cross-license agreement. Intel also said the structure of the deal between AMD and ATIC breaches a confidential portion of that agreement. Intel has asked AMD to make the relevant portion of the agreement public, but so far AMD has declined to do so. AMD's breach could result in the loss of licenses and rights granted to AMD by Intel under the agreement but subsequent stock prices suggest that both Intel and AMD’s shareholders are not convinced.
"Intellectual property is a cornerstone of Intel's technology leadership and for more than 30 years, the company has believed in the strategic importance of licensing intellectual property in exchange for fair value. However AMD cannot unilaterally extend Intel's licensing rights to a third party without Intel's consent," said Bruce Sewell, senior vice president and general counsel for Intel. We have attempted to address our concerns with AMD without success since October. We are willing to find a resolution but at the same time we have an obligation to our stockholders to protect the billions of dollars we've invested in intellectual property."
Under terms of the license agreement the notification to AMD means the parties will attempt to resolve the dispute through mediation. AMD quickly claimed Intel is in breach of this agreement by notifying AMD of any perceived breaches. Intel believes that position is inconsistent with the dispute resolution process outlined in the original agreement but AMD’s response poured scorn on the Intel assertions.
In a statement AMD responded that Intel’s action is an attempt to distract the world from the global antitrust scrutiny it faces. With a ruling from the European Commission and a U.S. trial date looming, and investigations by the U.S. FTC and NY Attorney General, AMD feels the clock is ticking on Intel’s practices, and yet with its dominant monopoly position it still tries to stifle competitors. AMD stated that should this matter proceed to litigation, they will prove that Intel fabricated this claim to interfere with the commercial relationships and violated the cross-license. According to AMD they remains in full compliance with the cross license agreement and believe that the structure of Global Foundries takes into account the cross-license agreements.
The AMD/Intel cross-license agreement is a two-way agreement, the benefits of which go to both companies. Intel leverages innovative AMD IP critical for its product designs under the cross license. This includes AMD patents related to 64-bit architecture extensions, integrated memory controller, multi-core architecture, etc.). The cross-license is very much a two-way street.
AMD revealed they informed Intel that the attempt to terminate AMD’s license itself constitutes a breach of the cross-license agreement, which, if uncured, gives AMD the right to terminate Intel’s license.
"Intellectual property is a cornerstone of Intel's technology leadership and for more than 30 years, the company has believed in the strategic importance of licensing intellectual property in exchange for fair value. However AMD cannot unilaterally extend Intel's licensing rights to a third party without Intel's consent," said Bruce Sewell, senior vice president and general counsel for Intel. We have attempted to address our concerns with AMD without success since October. We are willing to find a resolution but at the same time we have an obligation to our stockholders to protect the billions of dollars we've invested in intellectual property."
Under terms of the license agreement the notification to AMD means the parties will attempt to resolve the dispute through mediation. AMD quickly claimed Intel is in breach of this agreement by notifying AMD of any perceived breaches. Intel believes that position is inconsistent with the dispute resolution process outlined in the original agreement but AMD’s response poured scorn on the Intel assertions.
In a statement AMD responded that Intel’s action is an attempt to distract the world from the global antitrust scrutiny it faces. With a ruling from the European Commission and a U.S. trial date looming, and investigations by the U.S. FTC and NY Attorney General, AMD feels the clock is ticking on Intel’s practices, and yet with its dominant monopoly position it still tries to stifle competitors. AMD stated that should this matter proceed to litigation, they will prove that Intel fabricated this claim to interfere with the commercial relationships and violated the cross-license. According to AMD they remains in full compliance with the cross license agreement and believe that the structure of Global Foundries takes into account the cross-license agreements.
The AMD/Intel cross-license agreement is a two-way agreement, the benefits of which go to both companies. Intel leverages innovative AMD IP critical for its product designs under the cross license. This includes AMD patents related to 64-bit architecture extensions, integrated memory controller, multi-core architecture, etc.). The cross-license is very much a two-way street.
AMD revealed they informed Intel that the attempt to terminate AMD’s license itself constitutes a breach of the cross-license agreement, which, if uncured, gives AMD the right to terminate Intel’s license.
