Sep 23
Take a listen to creepy tracks from Saw X. David Duchovny talks Pet Sematary: Bloodlines. Plus, Upload prepares for season 3 with a new trailer, and what’s coming on Invasion. Spoilers now!
Sep 23
The New Jersey senator “has rightly decided” to temporarily give up the committee gavel amid corruption charges, said Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Sep 23
Amazon Restricts Authors to Self-Publishing Three Books a Day, a Totally Human Amount
Posted in: Today's Chili
As authors grapple with the anxiety of an impending AI takeover in the publishing world, Amazon wants you to know that it’s taking those concerns very seriously. The bookstore-turned-commerce giant has revealed a new self-publishing limit that cannot exceed three books per day.
Sep 23
Twitter, recently renamed X, is shutting down its Circles feature. Circles allows users to share posts with select people rather than all of their followers but it seems Elon Musk would prefer people just put it all out there or keep it to themselves. The feature will be removed next month, just over one year after Cir…
Sep 23
EU reinstates $400 million fine on Intel for blocking sales of competing chips
Posted in: Today's ChiliThe European Commission has imposed a €376.36 million ($400 million) fine on Intel for blocking the sales of devices powered by its competitors’ x86 CPUs. This brings one part of the company’s long-running antitrust court battle with the European authority to a close. If you’ll recall, the Commission slapped the chipmaker with a record-breaking €1.06 billion ($1.13 billion) fine in 2009 after it had determined that Intel abused its dominant position in the market. ye
It found back then that the company gave hidden rebates and incentives to manufacturers like HP, Dell and Lenovo for buying all or almost all their processors from Intel. The Commission also found that Intel paid manufacturers to delay or to completely cease the launch of products powered by its rivals’ CPUs “naked restrictions.” Other times, Intel apparently paid companies to limit those products’ sales channels. The Commission calls these actions “naked restrictions.”
The case has gone through several European courts since then, with either side lodging an appeal, depending on what the decision was. In 2017, the highest court in the European Union ordered the fine to be re-examined on the basis that the Commission didn’t conduct an economic assessment on how Intel’s activity impacted its rivals’ ability to compete against it.
Europe’s second highest court, the General Court, then decided last year that the Commission indeed failed to perform analysis of the company’s rebate scheme. As a result, it came to the conclusion that it couldn’t determine how the incentives Intel offered affected its competitors. It also scrapped Intel’s €1.06 billion fine, explaining that it’s not in a position to determine how much it actually has to pay, but it upheld previous courts’ decision that the company’s naked restrictions violated EU laws.
In its announcement, the European Commission gave a few examples of how Intel hindered the sales of competing products. It apparently paid HP between November 2002 and May 2005 to sell AMD-powered business desktops only to small- and medium-sized enterprises and via direct distribution channels. It also paid Acer to delay the launch of an AMD-based notebook from September 2003 to January 2004. Intel paid Lenovo to push back the launch of AMD-based notebooks for half a year, as well.
The Commission has since appealed the General Court’s decision to dismiss the part of the case related to the rebates Intel offered its clients. Intel, however, did not lodge an appeal for the court’s ruling on naked restrictions, setting it in stone. “With today’s decision, the Commission has re-imposed a fine on Intel only for its naked restrictions practice,” the European authority wrote. “The fine does not relate to Intel’s conditional rebates practice. The fine amount, which is based on the same parameters as the 2009 Commission’s decision, reflects the narrower scope of the infringement compared to that decision.” Seeing as the rebates part of the case is under appeal, Intel could still pay the rest of the fine in the future.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/eu-reinstates-400-million-fine-on-intel-for-blocking-sales-of-competing-chips-115922364.html?src=rss
Sep 23
Sharon Osbourne Believes It’s ‘Time To Stop’ Taking Ozempic After Dramatic Weight Loss
Posted in: Today's Chili“I didn’t actually want to go this thin, but it just happened,” the former reality star admitted during a recent talk show appearance.
Sep 23
Twitter, recently renamed X, is shutting down its Circles feature. Circles allows users to share posts with select people rather than all of their followers but it seems Elon Musk would prefer people just put it all out there or keep it to themselves. The feature will be removed next month, just over one year after Cir…
Sep 23
No matter what your level of knowledge is when it comes to The Toxic Avenger, you basically know what to expect. It’s right there in the phrase “The Toxic Avenger.” Someone is avenging and they’re toxic. Is that literal? Figurative? It doesn’t matter. This isn’t going to be serious. This is going to be very, very…
Sep 23
It’s Been a Rough Week for Rockets
Posted in: Today's Chili
It was an unfortunate week for the rocket industry, with three distinct setbacks occurring and challenging the plans of three different aerospace companies across the globe.
Sep 23
EU reinstates $400 million fine on Intel for blocking sales of competing chips
Posted in: Today's ChiliThe European Commission has imposed a €376.36 million ($400 million) fine on Intel for blocking the sales of devices powered by its competitors’ x86 CPUs. This brings one part of the company’s long-running antitrust court battle with the European authority to a close. If you’ll recall, the Commission slapped the chipmaker with a record-breaking €1.06 billion ($1.13 billion) fine in 2009 after it had determined that Intel abused its dominant position in the market. ye
It found back then that the company gave hidden rebates and incentives to manufacturers like HP, Dell and Lenovo for buying all or almost all their processors from Intel. The Commission also found that Intel paid manufacturers to delay or to completely cease the launch of products powered by its rivals’ CPUs “naked restrictions.” Other times, Intel apparently paid companies to limit those products’ sales channels. The Commission calls these actions “naked restrictions.”
The case has gone through several European courts since then, with either side lodging an appeal, depending on what the decision was. In 2017, the highest court in the European Union ordered the fine to be re-examined on the basis that the Commission didn’t conduct an economic assessment on how Intel’s activity impacted its rivals’ ability to compete against it.
Europe’s second highest court, the General Court, then decided last year that the Commission indeed failed to perform analysis of the company’s rebate scheme. As a result, it came to the conclusion that it couldn’t determine how the incentives Intel offered affected its competitors. It also scrapped Intel’s €1.06 billion fine, explaining that it’s not in a position to determine how much it actually has to pay, but it upheld previous courts’ decision that the company’s naked restrictions violated EU laws.
In its announcement, the European Commission gave a few examples of how Intel hindered the sales of competing products. It apparently paid HP between November 2002 and May 2005 to sell AMD-powered business desktops only to small- and medium-sized enterprises and via direct distribution channels. It also paid Acer to delay the launch of an AMD-based notebook from September 2003 to January 2004. Intel paid Lenovo to push back the launch of AMD-based notebooks for half a year, as well.
The Commission has since appealed the General Court’s decision to dismiss the part of the case related to the rebates Intel offered its clients. Intel, however, did not lodge an appeal for the court’s ruling on naked restrictions, setting it in stone. “With today’s decision, the Commission has re-imposed a fine on Intel only for its naked restrictions practice,” the European authority wrote. “The fine does not relate to Intel’s conditional rebates practice. The fine amount, which is based on the same parameters as the 2009 Commission’s decision, reflects the narrower scope of the infringement compared to that decision.” Seeing as the rebates part of the case is under appeal, Intel could still pay the rest of the fine in the future.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/eu-reinstates-400-million-fine-on-intel-for-blocking-sales-of-competing-chips-115922364.html?src=rss
Who's in charge here?
This is site is run by Sascha Endlicher, M.A., during ungodly late night hours. Wanna know more about him? Connect via Social Media by jumping to about.me/sascha.endlicher.