欧盟维持对英特尔10.6亿欧元反垄断罚单

国际电子商情讯，欧盟常设法院（二级法院）日前正式驳回英特尔(Intel)请求推翻欧盟2009年针对该公司的反垄断裁决的申请。英特尔这回输掉了一场旷日持久的官司，使得它不得不继续面对欧盟反垄断机构向它开具的一张10.6亿欧元天价罚单。 英特尔曾希望赢得官司，以减小罚单规模。但欧盟普通法院(EU General Court)周四维持了对英特尔的判罚，并裁定，英特尔的所有主张都不足以减小罚款规模。 “法院认为，英特尔提出的所有主张都不支持这一结论：罚款金额过高。” “相反，我们必须认为，鉴于此案的各项事实，这一罚款是适当的。” 事件来龙去脉：英特尔给回扣，逼得AMD无路可走 2009年，经过8年调查，欧盟委员会(European Commission)对英特尔作出了罚款10.6亿欧元（14.4亿美元）的反垄断处罚决定。这一罚款金额占英特尔2008年营收的4.15%。 欧盟委员会重罚英特尔的原因是，2002年至2007年间，美国PC厂商戴尔、惠普、日本NEC、大陆联想集团、台湾宏碁和德国零售商Media Saturn均接受了英特尔提供的回扣，这导致英特尔的竞争对手AMD无法向这些厂商提供x86处理器。 对于欧盟反垄断判决，英特尔在2012年7月向欧盟常设法庭提出上诉，声称欧盟委员会在起诉英特尔案件中依赖的证据并不充分，希望能够撤销或减少欧盟委员会对其作出的10.6亿欧元的罚款。 本周三，欧盟常设法院做出了判决，即对欧盟委员会的处罚决定予以支持。常设法院表示：“欧盟委员会展示了必备的法律标准，英特尔试图隐瞒其商业惯例中反竞争的本质，通过实施通盘性的战略，从战略上最重要的销售渠道来阻碍AMD。” 欧盟常设法院法官还表示，欧盟委员会向英特尔处以的10.6亿欧元罚款并未超标，这一罚款相当于英特尔2008年营收的4.15%，因为欧盟委员会有权对违反欧盟反垄断法律的公司作出最高为该公司当年营收10%的罚款处罚。 在败诉之后，英特尔可以依据法律条款向欧盟法院（Court of Justice of the European Union）继续提出上诉。 然而，Intel发言人Sophie Jacobs并未在发言中明确是否会上诉，仅表示：“我们对此决定非常失望。这是一个很复杂的官司。我们会对判决进行评估。” 本文授权编译自EE Times，版权所有，谢绝转载 参考英文原文：EU Denies Intel Appeal of $1.4B Fine，by Rick Merritt

相关阅读：
• 从Computex看来：PC还没死，只是在变异！
• 英特尔与瑞芯微合作，动了谁的奶酪？
• 英特尔芯平板已达130款，35%采用自家通信方案NpSesmc

{pagination} EU Denies Intel Appeal of $1.4B Fine Rick Merritt HERAKLION, Greece — A European court turned down Intel's appeal of a 2009 antitrust case in which it levied a ?.06 billion (US$1.43 billion) fine against Intel, its largest fine ever in an anti-competition case. Intel can still appeal the decision to Europe's highest court, the European Court of Justice, according to The New York Times. Intel did not immediately comment on a statement from the General Court of the European Union, which rejected the appeal June 12. The original case concluded in May 2009 that Intel made payments to computer makers Dell, Lenovo, Hewlett-Packard, and NEC on the condition that they purchased from Intel all or almost all of their x86 CPUs. In addition, Intel gave European PC retailer Media-Saturn payments for exclusively selling PCs using Intel processors, the court said. The original case also found Intel paid Acer, HP, and Lenovo to postpone or cancel the launch of AMD CPU-based products or to put restrictions on how the AMD-based PCs were distributed. The US government also conducted separate investigations against Intel and Microsoft for similar practices. AMD sparked both the US and European cases against Intel. Intel settled its case in the US. At the time of the original cases, some OEMs told EE Times at least some of the payments came as part of joint marketing agreements broadly used by Intel and Microsoft. The payments would often be substantial and come just before quarterly earnings, making them more attractive to PC makers operating on razor-thin profits, one HP source told EE Times. In a 2013 interview a former Intel executive described how some of those payment programs got their start with deals between Intel and IBM. Intel argued on several points in its European appeal that the fine should be eliminated or reduced. The European court rejected Intel's argument that the court needed to prove on a case-by-case basis that the so-called rebates hurt competition. It pointed in part to Intel's 70% or larger share of the x86 processor market. In its statement, the European court detailed reasons it denied Intel's arguments. For example, it said: Exclusivity rebates granted by an undertaking in a dominant position are, by their very nature, capable of restricting competition and foreclosing competitors from the market. It is thus not necessary to show that they are capable of restricting competition on a case by case basis. Intel attempted to conceal the anti-competitive nature of its practices and implemented a long term comprehensive strategy to foreclose AMD from the strategically most important sales channels. Regarding the fine it said: The fine is appropriate in the light of the facts of the case... the Commission set the proportion of the value of sales at 5% which is at the lower end of the scale which can go up to 30%. Moreover, the fine is equivalent to 4.15% of Intel's annual turnover, which is well below the 10% ceiling provided for.