While it may be old news by now, the ringing in our ears and the cosmic ripples created by the recent ruling against Intel is an event nobody should forget. Antitrust cases are at best a foray into the land of Grey. Corporate responsibility, abuse of dominant position and anti competitive behavior are not synonymous with capitalism but every so often very neutral responsible bodies may need to step in and help the process along. Protecting the consumer is indeed a responsibility, but why did AMD have to spend close on a decade trying to prove this...last we heard they weren't the consumer.

True to squeaky wheeled nature, people just love harping in about the terrible recession that grips the world(myself included). While we would believe that The Recession would stop at nothing short of stealing children in the night and putting the church to flame, the sad fact is that stable economies like many EU states are having trouble breathing. So why whip out the larger rubber one at a time like this?

To impose a fine of 1.06 billion Euros, almost 25% of Intel's sales,reeks of the quasi-socialist desperation that is so typically modern Europe. While the sad evolution of industry and capitalism seems to be touchy, feely, poor consumers freedom. the EU was most definitely not ungroundedin a reprimand. As to the extent of the vindication, I have some serious doubts.

Granted Intel was disgusting in their elbowing and the massive slant in the market is partly as a result, but other factors are also very important, The fact that AMD failed to keep up with the giant on the technological front in many ways over the last decade, their smaller research budget and their outsourced fabrication cannot be entirely attributed to Intel muscling them out of the market.

What does, however, add weight to AMD's case and simultaneously remove it from the EU commission are the proceeds of the enormous fine. While AMD and the consumer have been the apparent victims for the last decade, all that silicon fat cash is going into the EU's central budget where it will perform the noble task of reducing the "membership fees" for participating countries. How this benefits the poor sod running a crappy Duron or an overpriced Core 2 Quad , not to mention the AMD research and ATi merger disaster recovery fund, is yet to be seen.

While this may be the kind of thinking that had people burned in lesser cultures, I can't help but ask why the proceeds of the fine couldn't go to AMD? It could most definitely use a boost and it would do far more to increase competition. Sadly, this would reek of the absolute worst in the American legal system with just a hint of The Communist Manifesto.

Another salient concern in the whole debacle has been Intel's response to the ruling. Hours prior to the announcement of the fiduciary sodomy, Intel began getting the word out that they would be announcing a response. Their response was simply denial and the decision to vehemently appeal has possibly done more harm than good. Antitrust in the IT industry is the equivalent of the medieval witch accusation. Even if Intel avoids the pyre, the consumer is not only going to suspect anti competitive behavior but also that they are trying to escape their slap on the wrist.

There is, however, one shining star to this tale, especially for AMD fans. For years most people have erroneously condemned AMD to budget or gaming CPU's, the Pepsi of processing so to speak. Finally the White Knight has some dirt on his armour. While the damage to Intel's reputation (and budget) went unheeded by investors, people might start to consider the underdog as an option, exactly as they never did with Microsoft.

Looking forward then, the greatest thing any of us could hope for - Intel and AMD included - is a more competitive market;a market in which the title of underdog is once again seasonal.Perhaps in their heavy-hardness the misguided EU will bring balance to The Force, it's just a pity Intel has to pay with its success.