Today, the European Commission released a substantial portion of the evidence that it relied upon in finding that Intel violated antitrust laws with its controversial business practices. The evidence released included a massive amount of data, internal emails and anecdotal evidence that indicates numerous breaches of competition law.
This newly released non-confidential version of the European Commission’s decision shows that the Commission’s ruling against Intel was well researched and fact-based.
The Computer & Communications Industry Association has been an advocate for competition and innovation since its inception more than 35 years ago and has closely monitored the case against Intel because of its importance to the industry, consumers and innovation.
The following statement can be attributed to CCIA’s President and CEO Ed Black:
“Even though we have been closely following this case, we are surprised by the volume and probative value of the evidence against Intel that the European Commission released today. At over 500 pages, the evidence paints a clear picture of the extent of Intel’s illegal actions. We have watched and been involved in many enforcement cases over several decades, but this is one of the best-documented, most clear-cut antitrust cases—detailing a pattern of systemic, company wide behavior—we have seen.
“Internal email exchanges illustrate the lengths that Intel went to engage in its anticompetitive practices. Not only did Intel have a vast apparatus of employees and mechanisms in place to formulate and implement its exclusive arrangements, but it also spent a great deal of resources investigating, threatening and punishing those customers who did not comply with the restrictions on purchasing and selling AMD products. In fact, the evidence shows the contortions Intel went through so as to not put certain ‘arrangements’ in writing, apparently because it knew that what it was doing was illegal.
“Even a cursory examination of the evidence presented casts doubt on the veracity of Intel’s recent statements to the press, which appear misleading and desperate at best. The European Commission’s actions followed an extremely lengthy investigation and relied on a mountain of evidence. The scope and amount of evidence compiled makes Intel’s newest claims that the documented statements add up to nothing more than out of context commentary by some executives that were in no way related to a company-wide strategy extremely difficult to believe.
“Intel has yet to respond to the merits of the evidence against them. It continues to attempt to impugn the integrity of competition authorities that are merely doing their jobs, instead of dealing with the facts of the case. Transparency and the revelation of the record makes Intel’s PR strategy of denial unsustainable. As more and more evidence comes out, the case against Intel is becoming increasingly compelling.
“The record now shows that this $100 billion dollar monopolist is not the victim of mistreatment by the European Commission as Intel claims. The extensive evidence in this case points to a pattern of mistreatment and abuse–not of Intel– but of computer customers the world over.”
