[News] Intel Buries Criminal Evidence (Like Microsoft)

AMD alleges Intel suffering an e-mail epidemic

,----[ Quote
| McCoy said that the case in Delaware which is sending everyone into the
| deepest of snoozes was "bogged down" because of Intel's "epidemic failure" in
| its ability to produce emails.
`----

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=41347

AMD insists antitrust is a consumer issue

http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=B80C533F-57E3-4C82-8C90...2E7AF79

The consumer suffers while criminals in suits pump up their bank accounts and
delete dangerous E-mails.


Related:

Intel's anti-trust memos started vanishing from the top

,----[ Quote ]
| Chairman Craig Barrett, CEO Paul Otellini and sales chief Sean Maloney
| have appeared on a list of Intel employees thought to have deleted
| e-mails possibly relevant to AMD's anti-trust lawsuit against its
| larger rival. The missing e-mails have thrust a livid state of mind
| onto AMD's lawyers who have very serious problems with Intel's
| rather lax document retention policy.
|
| [...]
|
| CEO Otellini appears to have been one of these troublesome employees.
`----

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/11/intel_tortellini_episode/


U.S. judge orders Intel to try to recover e-mails

,----[ Quote ]
| Farnan gave Intel 30 days to recover as many of the missing e-mails
| as possible and to draw up a report on the steps it is taking to do
| so, Mulloy said.
`----

http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articlehybrid.aspx?storyID=urn:newsml:re...rs.com:
http://tinyurl.com/2fbanr


AMD: Intel Destroyed Evidence in Antitrust Case

,----[ Quote ]
| In an unpublished statement to the U.S. District Court of Delaware,
| AMD alleges Intel allowed the destruction of evidence in pending
| antitrust litigation.
`----

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=6352


Microsoft dirty tricks, part two (Bob Cringely)

,----[ Quote ]
| "So the outside vendor was Hewlett-Packard, one of Microsoft's
| hardware OEMs, which is to say Microsoft's bitch.
|
| The tape disappearance was blamed on HP, which  accepted the blame,
| and the employees directly involved kept expecting there to be
| repurcussions, especially legal ones.  They expected to be deposed by
| Burst lawyers.  But it never happened.
|
| This was, for Microsoft, a perfect ending. ..."
`----

http://www.technologyevangelist.com/2007/02/microsoft_dirty_tric_4.html


'---[ Quote ]
| In May 2004, Judge J. Frederick Motz ordered Microsoft to
| investigate Burst.com's claim that, in 2000, Allchin ordered
| Microsoft employees to destroy email after 30 days and not to
| archive their email, suggesting that this deletion policy
| might be an effort to eliminate material that would later be
| damaging in court. This case was settled out of court in March
| 2005, with Microsoft agreeing to pay Burst.com $60 million
| for nonexclusive rights to Burst.com's media player software.
`----

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Allchin