🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <10173@inews.intel.com> dpeterso@mipos2.UUCP (David Peterson) writes:
>	By the way, AMD was seeking unconditional rights to the
>386 design. They did not recieve this. They are not allowed to
>use the design in any future products. Ho hum, I smell another 

There is no such thing as "the 386 design". There are several 386
designs and AMD received full and perpetual rights to the technology
embodied in the Am386 including the right to use that technology in
future products. As usual, Intel has been treating their employees like
mushrooms and feeding them half-truths.

Try reading Intel's Annual Report. Most of the document dances with
deception by omission but there is one section where they admit what
the consequences of the liability phase of the arbitration might be,
instead of simply repeating over and over that "AMD wasn't awarded the
386".*

* The deception by omission is that the arbitration was two phased,
liability and remedies. It was never intended that anyone be awarded
anything in the liability phase, that was for the remedies phase.

-- 
My opinions are my own.