Intel (INTC) has admitted to some major gaffes in handling documents in an antitrust suit filed by Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), which is moving toward a trial next March. Now the chip giant says the shoe is on AMD’s foot.

Intel this week filed a motion seeking sanctions against AMD, alleging that its smaller rival failed to adequately retain and produce documents in the case and tried to hide its lapses. AMD rejects the allegations, characterizing them as an attempt to create a diversion from Intel’s own document-handling miscues.

The two companies believe the case–which AMD filed in June 2005, alleging that Intel abused its dominant market position–will generate more documents than any piece of civil litigation in U.S. history.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

A mainframe computer may seem as out-of-date as a typewriter in the age of Google (GOOG) and iPhones. But the half-century-old business is still crucial and lucrative enough to be drawing scrutiny from U.S. antitrust investigators.

International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) is now almost alone in the market for mainframes: high-end computers that run everything from Amtrak’s reservation system to benefits payments for the Social Security Administration. Market-researcher IDC estimated that in 2008 mainframes accounted for 9.9 percent of the world-wide $53 billion server market.

Toni Sacconaghi, an analyst for Sanford C. Bernstein, estimates that IBM’s direct revenue from sales of its System Z mainframes was about $3.5 billion, or less than 4 percent, of its $103.6 billion in2008 revenue.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Silicon Valley antitrust lawyer Gary Reback made his case against the Google Books settlement Tuesday, arguing that the settlement is illegal but could be remedied if the Justice Department insists that Google (GOOG) license the books it scanned to competitors.

In a court filing on behalf of the Open Book Alliance, a consortium that opposes the settlement, the attorney argues that the settlement between Google, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers gives publishers and Google monopoly control over the pricing of digital books. Reback, who was involved in spurring the Justice Department to bring an antitrust suit against Microsoft in the 1990s, co-founded the consortium along with the Internet Archive, a nonprofit that is trying to create a digital archive of the Web, last month. Many members of the consortium, including the Internet Archive, Amazon.com (AMZN), Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft (MSFT), have filed their own briefs opposing the settlement too.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Is Google (GOOG) too powerful? The Justice Department’s Christine Varney thinks so.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

“I think you are going to see a repeat of Microsoft.” Christine Varney’s blunt assessment sent a buzz through the audience at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. Varney, a partner at Hogan & Hartson and one of the country’s foremost experts in online law, was speaking at the ninth annual conference of the American Antitrust Institute, a gathering of top monopoly attorneys and economists.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Three times in the last month, government agencies have targeted Google (GOOG) for antitrust reviews. An outstanding private lawsuit alleges that Google tried to kill a business-to-business search engine with predatory pricing.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Silicon Valley was abuzz Wednesday with news that the Justice Department had begun an antitrust investigation into the hiring practices of some of the best-known companies in the technology and biotech industries, including Google, Apple, Yahoo and Genentech.

The question being asked most frequently was how the word “anticompetitive” could possibly be applied to the industry’s perpetual fight over talent.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

A couple of weeks ago, the new Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, Christine Varney, publicly repudiated a controversial report issued in the fall of 2008 by the Bush Justice Department. Free market ideologues responded to Varney’s announcement with a salvo of recriminations.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Many lessons have been drawn from the U.S. government’s antitrust assault on Microsoft (MSFT) in the late 1990s. Intel’s (INTC) new scrape with the European Union is likely to spark memories of one of the simplest: don’t put it in writing.

The Justice Department struggled to prove some of its points about Microsoft’s behavior. But it didn’t have much trouble attacking the contracts that the software company forged with various partners, such as Internet access providers, to discourage them from promoting the browser software used by rival Netscape. A federal appeals court upheld a lower court’s finding that the pacts were exclusionary and violated antitrust laws.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

As investors and analysts digest this morning’s Oracle-Sun news, some are wondering what will happen to Sun (JAVA)-owned MySQL, and whether combining the Oracle (ORCL) and MySQL database businesses would represent an antitrust concern.

While MySQL would be a small part of Oracle’s overall business, it’s a popular open-source database that competes with other Oracle offerings. The deal, writes Seeking Alpha’s Mike Butcher, “has massive implications for the future openness of Java and MySQL.”

“MySQL is clearly a big prize for Oracle,” writes Om Malik on GigaOm, who says that the acquisition takes out Oracle’s No. 1 threat.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

The planned advertising partnership between Google (GOOG) and Yahoo (YHOO), which was devised during Microsoft’s (MSFT) unsolicited bid for Yahoo, is headed for a federal antitrust challenge. And that could mean, according to one analyst, that Google could wind up walking away from the deal. Two days after the Association of National Advertisers sent a letter to the Justice Department opposing the Google-Yahoo ad pact, antitrust regulators hired high-powered attorney Sanford Litvack to lead its legal challenge to block the deal, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Read the rest of this post

Reports, rumors and innuendos are bouncing around the Web that Google may not want to cut an advertising deal with Yahoo after all. This before there is actually substantiation that Google and Yahoo are crafting an advertising deal, which was something of a rumor and innuendo in the first place, allegedly planted to let Microsoft know that Yahoo had options.

Google is allegedly worried about ticking off Washington officials who might think that if Google is playing ball with Yahoo, Google has become an antitrust violator that must be terminated. As if Google isn’t already close to monopoly power in search. It gets 67% of all searches, and that share keeps growing. Google worrying that a Yahoo deal will push it over the brink in antitrust is like Kim Jong-il worrying that if he puts on a party hat he’ll be considered crazy.

Read the rest of this post

Can Microsoft really put together the concepts “interoperability” and “principles?” That’s the question to ask following Thursday’s announcement about Microsoft’s so-called new “interoperability principles.” For quick clarification: The principles aren’t really new–the European Union’s Competition Commission required the principles’ framework, in response to Microsoft’s March 2004 adverse antitrust ruling. The timing also is suspicious, given the potential public-relations bang Microsoft could get about a week before a key vote will determine whether or not ISO adopts OOXML (Open Office XML) as a standard.

Read the rest of this post

After years of rumors, it finally happened. On Friday, Microsoft made its buyout offer for Yahoo. But while that was expected to happen, as both companies have had trouble catching online advertising juggernaut Google, what wasn’t so expected was that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer would go all Murdoch on Yahoo with a hostile bid at a 62% premium over Yahoo’s stock price. But unlike Rupert Murdoch’s hostile bid for Dow Jones, Ballmer doesn’t have to contend with family ownership or strange stock structures.

It’s easy to get wrapped up in the BIGGEST BUYOUT IN INTERNET HISTORY and only consider the business aspects, the antitrust problems, the privacy concerns, Google’s crocodile tears over Microsoft’s unchecked power, and so on. But what about the people who use Yahoo’s various online services, or for that matter, Microsoft’s? What will happen to them in a merger, and how might their experience change?

Read the rest of this post