Replies to post #68791 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[The Duke of URL]

Firing from the lip:

Sounds like AMD is going to argue that they are not transferring any rights to intellectual property. Sound like that is why the are keeping the "Design Company" and taking an interest in the new Foundry Company.

The reality, of course, is that AMD will have to explain to Abu-Dabi how to manufacture and that would seem to involve disclosure.

(The only stuff I have seen of the agreement is the stuff on the web.)

[tecate]

Thank you for that link. Mosemann knows quite a bit about the semi business and has been quite consistent in his backing of Intel as the better investment, which could slant his view. But I think he makes a good point, AMD will obviously lose their court case here in the USA.

[Windsock]

This comment is 100% on target in my view.

“AMD, in our view, is likely violating the Intel x86 cross-license, but we suspect Intel may look the other way as it benefits Intel to have an AMD that will over time have increasing variable costs (good for ASPs),” Mosesmann wrote in an Oct. 7 research note. “Intel may choose to entice AMD to drop the anti-trust suits against Intel in return for this altruistic gesture (true realpolitik policy at play here).”