Intel, the semiconductor manufacturer, says it will fight antitrust charges filed by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Mr Craig Barrett, its newly-appointed chief executive, said Intel would appeal to a federal court to overrule the commission if necessary.
Intel, the world's largest chipmaker, is charged with abusing its market power by coercing some of its customers in the computer industry to drop patent claims against it. Intel withheld, or threatened to withhold, information about new chips and prototype samples from these customers.
Mr Barrett, on a visit to Tokyo, said the antitrust case would have "little effect" on Intel's business in the short term. But, in the longer term, should it lose its legal battle, the case could "chill Intel and all future innovators" and harm the entire personal computer industry, Intel has argued in a related lawsuit.
The FTC had misinterpreted antitrust law, Mr Barrett said. The patent infringement disputes were a "customer relations" issue, not a restraint of competition with rival chipmakers.
Central to the case against Intel is a dispute between the chipmaker and Intergraph, an Alabama manufacturer of computer workstations.
Intergraph separately filed patent infringement and antitrust charges against Intel in November and won a preliminary court order against the company in April. The order forced Intel to share information and product samples with Intergraph, pending the outcome of the case.
The order is very similar to "remedies" proposed by the FTC, which would apply to all Intel customers.
In its appeal against the order in the Intergraph case, Intel lays out the expected effects in the first detailed indication of how it will address the FTC charges. It says the judge's order "deprives Intel of its right as a patent-holder selectively to license and sell" its technology.
The pace of innovation in the PC industry would slow if Intel was prevented from pursuing its current practice of sharing technology in advance of product introductions with about 20 of its largest customers, the company added yesterday.
In its appeal in the Intergraph case, Intel argued that it should not be compelled to do business with any particular computer company. It cited case law, saying: "Even a monopolist may deal with whomever it chooses and has no general duty to help its competitors." Appeal courts have held that companies "cannot be held liable under (antitrust law) . . . by refusing to license the patent to others".
Intel said reasons for withholding information and product samples from Intergraph were "very legitimate".
