Feeds

Intel and AMD tussle over antitrust case evidence

Dueling file motions seek sanction

Build a business case: developing custom apps

Intel and AMD crossed sabers in US District court on Wednesday with dueling motions seeking sanctions against one another. Both their calls for courtly relief relate to the other's supposedly abominable email-saving strategies for the antitrust case filed by AMD four years ago.

Intel to AMD: I know you are, but what am I?

Chipzilla swung first with a motion in Delaware's district court claiming AMD's retention policies aren't nearly so to notch as the company has claimed.

Back in 2007, Intel itself was forced to admit what it calls "lapses and errors in document retention" that resulted in an untold score of possibly relevant documents and emails for the case to be irrevocably destroyed. (AMD prefers the turn of phrase "aggressive auto-delete system" to describe its rival's former policy). But now Intel claims it has become a born-again data preservationist and fancies to have undertaken what it describes in Wednesday's motion as "what is likely the most extensive and expensive document remediation effort ever undertaken."

AMD, on the other hand, has maintained to the court that its document retention program has been "exemplary," Intel said. Yet because Intel reckons it understands from its own cock-ups that "exemplary" isn't easy, it's skeptical of the claim. The company asserts it has sought discovery of AMD's retention program, "which AMD resisted at every turn."

"It is now clear that AMD's exemplary preservation program suffered from myriad problems," Intel wrote in the filing. "These problems had to be dragged out of AMD, usually only after a Court order. At the end of this long and expensive process, it turns out that AMD's efforts were far from exemplary — rather, they were flawed and incomplete and resulted in massive data loss."

Intel said it would "rather focus on the merits of the case," but alas can't ignore AMD's supposedly serious retention failures and alleged efforts to conceal them from the Court.

"The gist of this is quite simple," Intel spokesman Chuck Mulloy told El Reg. "We voluntarily told the court in 2007 of our problems and AMD, almost immediately, jumped all over us and pointed out how irresponsible we were and how responsible they were. Well, it turns out it wasn't so great after all. And throughout this whole process since then, they have tried to hide the fact that it's not an ideal program from us and the court."

Mulloy said is a span of time somewhere between November 2004 and March of 2005 when AMD was not retaining and producing documents when they were supposed to be.

The company asked the court to sanction AMD for these claimed failures and to compel AMD to remediate its document production with "responsive, unique, non-privileged documents" within 60 days of the order. It also wants AMD to take reasonable steps to provide Intel and the Court with a written summary of its preservation process within 15 days of the summary.

AMD to Intel: I'm rubber, and you're glue...

AMD, in return, dismissed Intel's accusation as having "no merit" and filed a separate motion on Wednesday regarding the rival company's alleged past and present failure to preserve evidence.

The filing asserts Intel has "severely and irreparably" harmed AMD's ability to present its case — adding Intel could have easily avoided its "evidence preservation fiasco" had it exercised a "modicum of diligence" in implementing and complying with an effective document preservation program.

"At a company where paper trails are strongly discouraged, Intel imposed a 'move-it-or-lose-it' document preservation regime where any document not manually saved was permanently expunged," AMD's filing claims.

The company also dismissed Intel's attempts to fix its data retention policies, calling it a "heralded, highly vaunted, but ultimately unsuccessful, attempt at remediation."

It also has something to say about Intel's accusations:

"Finally, deploying a favorite strategy of wrongdoers that 'the best defense is a good offense,' Intel besmirches AMD's preservation program as no better than its own. This counter offensive goes nowhere," the filing claims.

"In sum, Intel's feckless attempts at preservation have left AMD without the benefit of at least hundreds of thousands and probably over a million relevant documents with which to prosecute its case," it goes on to say. "How many exactly were permanently lost, AMD will never know."

AMD asks the judge order that the jury be told that Intel permanently destroyed documents and that the jury may presume the documents would have been favorable to AMD's antitrust claim.

AMD further requests the court order Intel to pay attorneys' fees and costs associated with investigating and prosecuting this particular motion.

“We are confident that the court will affirm our position on Intel’s failure to preserve evidence, and see Intel’s defensive motion as a meritless distraction tactic,” an AMD spokesman told El Reg in an emailed statement.

A copy of Intel's latest motion can be found here (PDF), and AMD's motion here. ®

The essential guide to IT transformation

More from The Register

next story
So, Apple won't sell cheap kit? Prepare the iOS garden wall WRECKING BALL
It can throw the low cost race if it looks to the cloud
End of buttons? Apple looks to patent animating iPhone sidewalls
Filing suggests handset with display strips
One step closer to ROBOT BUTLERS: Dyson flashes vid of VACUUM SUCKER bot
Latest cleaner available for world+dog in September
Samsung Gear S: Quick, LAUNCH IT – before Apple straps on iWatch
Full specs for wrist-mounted device here ... but who'll buy it?
Apple promises to lift Curse of the Drained iPhone 5 Battery
Have you tried turning it off and...? Never mind, here's a replacement
Now that's FIRE WIRE: HP recalls 6 MILLION burn-risk laptop cables
Right in the middle of Burning Mains Man week
Apple's iWatch? They cannae do it ... they don't have the POWER
Analyst predicts fanbois will have to wait until next year
Tim Cook in Applerexia fears: New MacBook THINNER THAN EVER
'Supply chain sources' give up the goss on new iLappy
Reg man looks through a Glass, darkly: Google's toy ploy or killer tech specs?
Tip: Put the shades on and you'll look less of a spanner
prev story

Whitepapers

Top 10 endpoint backup mistakes
Avoid the ten endpoint backup mistakes to ensure that your critical corporate data is protected and end user productivity is improved.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Backing up distributed data
Eliminating the redundant use of bandwidth and storage capacity and application consolidation in the modern data center.
The essential guide to IT transformation
ServiceNow discusses three IT transformations that can help CIOs automate IT services to transform IT and the enterprise
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.