Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EU probes Oracle-Sun deal, cites open-source issue

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    did intel really know them? could it? Very few lawyers know even a fraction of what the law entails. Canada is a small population and was a country for little over 100 years. Our tax law alone is too large for any 1 man to read. any 10 men? 20 men? 20 women? not an easy state of affairs. Now we compare it to europe.

    Enough to make a man cry.

    Intel diddnt do its research, that puts it in the wrong but doesn't make it fair. and last i checked that was what justice was.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
      More regulated and properly regulated are different. My cause is against the arbitrary fines against companies. What we agree on is patching the stupid holes in the legal system.
      But the EU fines are simply enforcing their legislation!

      Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
      Government needs to protect its people(...)
      Which is why the EU passed it's antitrust laws - to protect its people from monopolies. Intel broke those laws and were made to pay a fine. How is that wrong?

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
        did intel really know them? could it? Very few lawyers know even a fraction of what the law entails. Canada is a small population and was a country for little over 100 years. Our tax law alone is too large for any 1 man to read. any 10 men? 20 men? 20 women? not an easy state of affairs. Now we compare it to europe.

        Enough to make a man cry.

        Intel diddnt do its research, that puts it in the wrong but doesn't make it fair. and last i checked that was what justice was.
        Fair is everyone playing by the same rules. No other company broke the antitrust law - why should Intel be excused?

        A company the size of Intel would have a legal team numbering in the hundreds, if not thousands. And yes, it is their responsibility to understand the law in the jurisdictions they operate. Ignorance of the law is no defence anywhere.

        Comment


        • #34
          Now it gets complicating

          Justice
          Originally posted by http://www.thefreedictionary.com/justice
          1. The quality of being just; fairness.
          http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarge...ust-fine-ever/

          The European Commissioner for Competition Policy stated throughout the period covered by the decision, Intel held at least 70% of the worldwide market in x86 server CPUs, and used anti-competitive practices to hold that position.
          But as usualy. the EU is retarded and like the oracle ordeal they had no idea what they were talking about.

          x86 cpu's are not computers as we know it. We have how many arm licencees, mips? sparc? power? they all serve a purpose. x86 is for the desktop. is this fair? no. They might as well go after IBM because they have made so many supercomputers.

          Justice had failed to be served. Equity was not present.

          The ruling was in question
          “The EC’s use of huge fines against market-leading firms - fines calculated from a firm’s world-wide sales, not from harm to European consumers - discourages aggressive competition that benefits consumers,” Ronald A. Cass, Chairman, Center for the Rule of Law, said in a statement. “Consumer harm should be the concern for competition law, and here instead consumers saw sharp declines in cost and increases in product quality - even Intel’s complaining rival, AMD, enjoyed historic success during the period it claims Intel’s actions foreclosed competition.”
          So i ask, was justice served? are monopolies bad if quality goes up and price goes down? monopolies, like any company can swing both ways.

          Legislation let banks mess up the economy, not lack of legislation. Holes existed. For the mortgage issue in particular, bush wanted to get visible minorities in houses. Turns out they couldn't afford them. I debated ridiculous legislation, and i have proven that.

          Comment


          • #35
            I just found an interesting Q/A article about the Intel case over at Groklaw. Some choice quotes:
            ...Intel gave wholly or partially hidden rebates to computer manufacturers on condition that they bought all, or almost all, their x86 central processing units (CPUs) from Intel. Intel also made direct payments to a major retailer on condition it stock only computers with Intel x86 CPUs. Second, Intel made direct payments to computer manufacturers to halt or delay the launch of specific products containing a competitor's x86 CPUs and to limit the sales channels available to these products. Intel is obliged desist from the specific practices identified in this case and not to engage in these or equivalent practices in the future.

            ...Intel limited consumer choice and stifled innovation by preventing innovative products for which there was a consumer demand from reaching end customers. Such practices deter innovative companies which might otherwise wish to enter and compete in the market. By ordering Intel to end its abusive practices, competition on the x86 CPU market will play out on the merits with the effect that innovation to the benefit of the consumer can flourish.

            Does the Commission seek to limit companies' ability to provide customers with discounts?

            No. This case is about the conditions associated with Intel's rebates and payments, not the rebates and payments themselves. What is at stake here are loyalty or fidelity rebates, granted on condition that a customer buys all or most of its requirements from the dominant undertaking, thereby preventing that customer from purchasing from competitors. Intel also paid clients to delay or not launch computers incorporating a competitor's CPUs, a conduct which is not linked at all to a company's ability to provide customers with discounts.

            ...the Commission acts in the interests of consumers. The Commission does not look at the specific interests of individual companies, but is charged with ensuring that competition on the merits is safeguarded. This creates an environment where consumers can benefit and where innovation can flourish.

            ...

            Intel is a US company. What gives the European Commission authority to decide whether its behaviour is legal or not?

            Intel sells its products inter alia in the European Union, which is one of its main markets in the world. It must therefore respect EU antitrust rules in the same way that European companies must respect US law when operating on the other side of the Atlantic.

            ...

            What percentage of Intel's turnover does the fine represent?

            The fine represents 4.15 % of Intel's turnover in 2008. This is less than half the allowable maximum, which is 10% of a company's annual turnover.

            Comment


            • #36
              ders a million sites we can look at which contract the same information both our ways. I think we have to agree to disagree.

              Certainly an interesting debate tho. I have literally been hitting bud for the past 10 hours, sense my dog died . So im going to go to bed and not wake up for a week.


              BTW krazy, i agree with alot of your points. I just like to keep a debate going .

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                But as usualy. the EU is retarded and like the oracle ordeal they had no idea what they were talking about.

                x86 cpu's are not computers as we know it. We have how many arm licencees, mips? sparc? power? they all serve a purpose. x86 is for the desktop. is this fair? no. They might as well go after IBM because they have made so many supercomputers.

                Justice had failed to be served. Equity was not present.
                I'm not sure what you're saying here. They broke the law and had to pay a fine. How is that not just?

                Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                The ruling was in question
                ... by some US lawyer. Fortunately, he isn't in the majority in the EU or in the US (both have antitrust laws). Intel is going to court in 2010 in the US.

                Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                So i ask, was justice served? are monopolies bad if quality goes up and price goes down? monopolies, like any company can swing both ways.
                History shows that they can't. And if you see my groklaw link, the EU have a guidance paper which...
                includes a rigorous, effects-based analysis which has demonstrated that Intel's conduct has reduced consumer choice and limited innovation in the market.
                More QA on this here.

                Edit: I didn't see your last post.. I'm sorry to hear that.

                And I agree that we disagree :P. It's really just another political debate..
                Last edited by krazy; 09-07-2009, 06:19 AM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                  for the most part you are right. But you failed to read what i already wrote.

                  1. If global brands like MS or Intel where barred from selling in a particular jurisdiction. That jurisdiction would collapse.
                  You've forgotten about the WTO. The planet in interconnected now. Laws are enforced by global institutions. You're also misreading me. I never said ms or intel would be barred from a jurisdiction. I said the cash flow they generate could be garnished. At substantial penalties, if they didn't willingly comply.

                  Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                  2. Your argument about manipulating government is only true in cases where the government is bad. If the voter is stupid, the voter will get a stupid government. And to think only a little over 50% of people voted for Obama.....
                  NO, NO, NO!!! It only requires the voter to be complacent and willing to accept the story presented to him by the media. When the corporations gain control over the media the ability of the voter to get accurate info is greatly diminished. Given human nature being what it is, they will accept most seemingly reasonable stories until it starts hurting them personally.

                  Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                  3. You have no idea what your talking about. That conspiracy stuff may fly well in science fiction novels but it stops at that. Your basis behind that REQUIRES everyone in a particular jurisdiction to be evil. If all are bad then what is good? Once again, you need good government. The American example is getting tiresome to repeat.
                  The fact that corporations would try to influence laws and regulations is so obvious and ingrained in government I can't believe you're denying it. Look at the campaign donor list of any important pol and you'll see all of the major corporations on it as well as a host of PACs, many of which are sponsored by corporations.

                  Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                  3. Monopolies dont stifle innovation, thats a load of crap. I beg you to provide a real world example. If anything companies like google encourage this by providing trips and perks to its employees. This helps google become a better and larger company. Historically when a situation is bad, people are pressured with ways to solve it. For example, Soviet russia was a hell of alot better then the TSAR, people got motivated to throw the TSAR after they were treated like garbage.
                  I provided the well known example of Standard Oil. You just provided another with the Tsar. He had a monopoly on all economic activity in Russia. His abuse of power and and control is what got him overthrown. This is exactly what I meant when I said:
                  "
                  the corporations (or Tsar) can siphon as much as they want out of the cash flow the citizenry generates. When they over reach and the facade comes tumbling down as it recently has with the mortgage crisis (or the economic crisis in tsarist Russia), the public has to be fed more bones and the most obvious inequities addressed." Or in the case of the tsar: Off with their Heads!!!

                  Closer to home... What about Intel and AMD. If not for the anti-monopoly laws they could have undercut their prices severely by selling their chips at as large a loss as they needed to, until AMD went out of business, then raise their prices all they wanted to recoup their losses. They tried that anyway, but they had to at least look like they were playing fair and constrain their actions to avoid being too obvious, preventing the blatant price cutting that would have bankrupted AMD. This allowed AMD to continue to stay in the game.

                  You seem to have forgotten about Intel losing $100million to AMD in the recent lawsuit, or maybe you think all would be well if AMD had gone bankrupt. Then intel would have developed quad core chips anyway, just like they developed Pentiums through the nineties and early 2000's.

                  (PS I can get you a great deal on some Florida property. Warm climate, close to town, real prime real estate, at firesale prices, and it's under water less than 3 months a year. PM me for details)

                  Fact is intel rested on their laurels, raked in the money, and let development stagnate until AMD overtook and passed them in chip performance. Then when their income was finally threatened they put increasingly larger amounts of time and money into development and there's been mere advances in chip performance in the last 5 years than in the previous 20. They even put out press releases saying they were going to do that. Do you really think that would have happened if AMD hadn't threatened their dominant position???

                  Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                  BTW, if google can come up from nothing and now compete with M$, it must mean opportunity to be competitive exists. So if a company is top dog, it doesn't mean it will be forever.
                  No, but you've forgotten that ms was fighting a monopoly lawsuit then. That greatly constrained it's ability to attack Google and probably bankrupt or absorb them. If a republican administration had been in Washington then, there would have been no lawsuit and probably no Google, at least as we know it. You don't seem to be aware of the netscape, internet explorer war of the last decade.

                  Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                  Oh and 1 more thing. I would like an answer on where the corporate fines go to in the EU. I really am curious.
                  I would assume they go where all the rest of the taxes and fines go. In the EU budget, to be spent however they want. All income and expenditures are in the public record. Where do the taxes and fine in Canada go?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Sheesh, how has this thread gone up in such a flamewar? It's a known fact Oracle has been buying away its (smaller) competitors whenever it has managed and merged their know-how of SQL products into its own. It seems almost like users here are trying to excuse their own blindness by telling EU makes stupid decisions. I at least admit myself I was blind and didn't realize what Oracle was actually doing when they bought Sun. MySQL was very likely the only interesting part of the company to them.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
                      MySQL was very likely the only interesting part of the company to them.
                      I wouldn't be surprised if they were interested in getting Solaris as well. Oracle is very much about big installations, scalability, redundancy, and other stuff that can be considerably enhanced by the right OS features. Nothing stops them from maintaining their own patches to Linux, but those might not make it upstream (whether "upstream" in this case is an enterprise distro or mainline). A Sun buyout means that Oracle is upstream for Solaris, and has access to the top architects (assuming that they don't leave).

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        lol i wake up to find people are arguing with me over things i agree with them on.

                        I will make a few factual notes this time tho. For the sake of clarity. Oh and LenS thats too much for me to read, After i woke up.

                        The WTO, is useless. Up here we always get shafted trade wise by the Americans. China consistently manipulates the system. The worlds 2 major powers could give less about the WTO, and they should. The WTO has no real power to do anything. Anything you have ever been told about a global institution being stable or functional is a load of crap unless it has a military to back it up. As i grow older i realise more and more how political power and military power go hand in hand.

                        Corporate Lobbying is a problem, especially in the US. I dont think the republican party would be able to stand on its feet without the corporate donations. Should they be allowed to do this? well theres 2 ways to look at it. Corporations pay alot on taxes, but at the same time they can influence the environment to pay less of them. Its a trade off that largely boils down to personal preference because a real answer doesnt exist.

                        Brainwashing is happening. Yes it is happening in the US alot, but it happens everywhere. It happens in capitalist nations. It happens in North Korea.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                          Chrysler also had lots of debt with America, patents, who knows what else. For these reasons its no wonder they had to get involved. A similar thing happened when a chinese company wanted to buy some oil company a while back. It was stopped because it would mean the chinese could get technology that had military uses. This is protecting the people, not penalising a company for being too big. It came down to politics.
                          Of course, oil - military?? No its just cause they are scared the chinese will become too powerful. And protecting who? The people? No, their money.

                          The Chinese have much easier ways to get american technologies. Its called plain corruption - quite easy to do especially in these times of uncertain incomes

                          Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                          personal freedoms are respected to an extreme.
                          Really? Where are you from? That is far far from true. Lets have a look at racism for example. Well I guess you could say allowing racism is a personal freedom.... Freedom of speech? Wait no they dont have that - bush made sure to take what little was left.

                          Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                          When the EU gets into bed with these major corporations it is doing so under the assumption that it will get what it wants.
                          Well of course. They only control the EU market - so they cant exactly loose... I dont see your point, you only 'go to bed' with someone under the assumption you'll get what you want. If you want a cuddle and you know you aint gonna get one, you dont go to bed with someone who you are sure wont give you one ;-)

                          Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                          I said it and ill say it again, the world runs on MS/Intel. if an economy took out the systems it uses to operate then you have no economy.
                          So? Doesnt mean it cant change.
                          Plus banking systems, pretty much all run unix, and currently the rule america... Look at the TOP500 - also probably the most expensive computers. 5 (I think its the right number) run windows. I wouldnt say thats rulling the world.

                          And anyways who said antyhing about removing those systems? Even if microsoft was banned from selling in europe, it wouldnt mean people have to uninstall all their windows licenses!

                          Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                          Yes it is happening in the US alot, but it happens everywhere. It happens in capitalist nations. It happens in North Korea.
                          But only in the US do 50% of the population think einstein is american....

                          Cant believe you compared the USA as worst than North Korea. Respect.
                          Last edited by lordmozilla; 09-08-2009, 07:30 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by lordmozilla View Post
                            But only in the US do 50% of the population think einstein is american....
                            In fairness, Einstein *did* become a US citizen in 1940 so calling him "American" isn't such a stretch. I think most Americans understand that he was not "Born in the USA".

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              lordmozilla, im afraid you greatly perverted my words. To such a degree its probably not worth noting but because i have all day i might as well.

                              -everyone is scared the Chinese will get too powerful, especially Europe. but even the Chinese know that there will be no winner of world war 3. Europe is becoming a group of welfare states, and like Canada they can reduce the size of their military(s) because of the NATO nuclear umbrella provided by the united states. So back to the basics, who has anything to lose? well, the US wants the "empire" as i will call it to be far lasting and to do that it needs europe. On the flipside, Europe needs that umbrella of protection. However more and more people are coming out and saying that such provided protection is a fallacy. What does this have to do with oracle and sun? well it mostly comes down to technology. Name 1 mainstream European semiconductor company. Guess what, all the best ones are in america. And corruption, is far less prevelent then you are led to belive. For example the Russians once had clones of an old intel processor. Today they are worried how so many of the worlds supercomputers are built in the united states. If such corruption was as widespread as you believe, then the Chinese wouldn't have gotten the F16 design plans from the Israelites, they would have got it from the state department. Should such technology be leaked they wouldn't be using ak-47's and various other 50 year old technologies.

                              Your bush spur is totally opinionated. Racism is everywhere, whether you believe it is or not. Playing HoN alone, i had Brazilians screaming out 9/11 and the "n" word because i spoke english. They have no idea about either of these concepts. Regardless of your personal opinions, they love their constitution and so do their courts.

                              I have fallen into said bed trap before. Awkward circumstances. Now i have call her my gf and have for over a year.

                              500 supercomputers dont run a country. M$ windows is the choice of many for the backend because people are stupid. You cant deny people are stupid . For the front end, its almost all M$ windows. And no you dont need to remove hardware or licences, however M$ could block updates and computer hardware goes obsolete very quickly.

                              And no i did not say the usa was worse then north korea. Please read again.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
                                Name 1 mainstream European semiconductor company.
                                Philips aka NXP Semiconductors

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X