Editing Intel (section)

===Competition, antitrust, and espionage===
{{See also|AMD v. Intel}}
By the end of the 1990s, [[microprocessor]] performance had outstripped software demand for that CPU power.{{Citation needed|date=July 2023}} Aside from high-end server systems and software, whose demand dropped with the end of the "[[dot-com bubble]]",<ref>{{Cite book |last=Tedlow |first=Richard S. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zQamXENAalkC&dq=microprocessor+demand+dropped+with+the+end+of+the+%22dot-com+bubble%22&pg=PR15 |title=Andy Grove: The Life and Times of an American Business Icon |date=2007 |publisher=Penguin |isbn=978-1-59184-182-1 |language=en |access-date=July 6, 2023 |archive-date=October 5, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231005044322/https://books.google.com/books?id=zQamXENAalkC&dq=microprocessor+demand+dropped+with+the+end+of+the+%22dot-com+bubble%22&pg=PR15 |url-status=live }}</ref> consumer systems ran effectively on increasingly low-cost systems after 2000.

Intel's strategy was to develop processors with better performance in a short time, from the appearance of one to the other, as seen with the appearance of the Pentium II in May 1997, the Pentium III in February 1999, and the Pentium 4 in the fall of 2000, making the strategy ineffective since the consumer did not see the innovation as essential,<ref>{{Cite book |last1=McDonough |first1=John |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HZLtCQAAQBAJ&dq=new+intel+processors+made+older+ones+obsolete&pg=PA1239 |title=The Advertising Age Encyclopedia of Advertising |last2=Egolf |first2=Karen |date=June 18, 2015 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-135-94906-8 |language=en |access-date=July 6, 2023 |archive-date=October 5, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231005044322/https://books.google.com/books?id=HZLtCQAAQBAJ&dq=new+intel+processors+made+older+ones+obsolete&pg=PA1239 |url-status=live }}</ref> and leaving an opportunity for rapid gains by competitors, notably [[AMD]]. This, in turn, lowered the profitability{{Citation needed|date=May 2009}} of the processor line and ended an era of unprecedented dominance of the PC hardware by Intel.{{Citation needed|date=July 2007}}

Intel's dominance in the [[x86]] microprocessor market led to numerous charges of [[antitrust]] violations over the years, including [[Federal Trade Commission|FTC]] investigations in both the late 1980s and in 1999, and civil actions such as the 1997 suit by [[Digital Equipment Corporation]] (DEC) and a patent suit by [[Intergraph]]. Intel's market dominance (at one time{{When|date=May 2009}} it controlled over 85% of the market for 32-bit x86 microprocessors) combined with Intel's own hardball legal tactics (such as its infamous 338 patent suit versus PC manufacturers)<ref>{{Cite news|last=McCausland|first=Richard|date=May 24, 1993|title=Counterpunch: Amx86 buyers get 'legal aid.' – Advanced Micro Devices offers legal aid to manufactures of Amx86-based machines warned by Intel Corp. to take out patent licenses|work=FindArticles|publisher=LookSmart Ltd.|url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EKF/is_n1964_v39/ai_13901771|url-status=dead|access-date=July 12, 2007|archive-url=http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20091001091856/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EKF/is_n1964_v39/ai_13901771|archive-date=October 1, 2009}}</ref> made it an attractive target for litigation, culminating in Intel agreeing to pay AMD $1.25 billion and grant them a perpetual patent cross-license in 2009 as well as several anti-trust judgements in Europe, Korea, and Japan.<ref>{{Cite news |title=Intel criticizes, AMD applauds Japan anti-monopoly ruling |url=https://www.edn.com/intel-criticizes-amd-applauds-japan-anti-monopoly-ruling/ |last=Clarke |first=Peter |date=March 8, 2005 |access-date=October 15, 2022 |work=EDN |archive-date=October 15, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221015214224/https://www.edn.com/intel-criticizes-amd-applauds-japan-anti-monopoly-ruling/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |title=Korea fines Intel $25 million for antitrust violations |url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/2786059/korea-fines-intel--25-million-for-antitrust-violations.html |last=Schwankert |first=Steven |date=June 5, 2008 |access-date=October 15, 2022 |work=Computerworld |archive-date=October 15, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221015215730/https://www.computerworld.com/article/2786059/korea-fines-intel--25-million-for-antitrust-violations.html |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |title=Intel to pay AMD $1.25 billion, settle disputes |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-intel-amd/intel-to-pay-amd-1-25-billion-settle-disputes-idUSTRE5AB2LL20091112 |last=Lawsky |first=David |date=November 12, 2009 |access-date=October 15, 2022 |work=Reuters |archive-date=October 15, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221015214223/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-intel-amd/intel-to-pay-amd-1-25-billion-settle-disputes-idUSTRE5AB2LL20091112 |url-status=live }}</ref>

A case of [[industrial espionage]] arose in 1995 that involved both Intel and AMD. [[Bill Gaede]], an [[Argentina|Argentine]] formerly employed both at AMD and at Intel's [[Chandler, Arizona|Arizona]] plant, was arrested for attempting in 1993 to sell the [[i486]] and [[P5 (microarchitecture)|P5]] Pentium designs to AMD and to certain foreign powers.<ref name="intel-spy">{{Cite news|date=October 20, 1995|title=Worker Pleads Not Guilty in Intel Spy Case|work=The New York Times|url=https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE7D81239F933A15753C1A963958260|access-date=July 12, 2007|archive-date=December 17, 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081217020559/http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE7D81239F933A15753C1A963958260|url-status=live}}</ref> Gaede videotaped data from his computer screen at Intel and mailed it to AMD, which immediately alerted Intel and authorities, resulting in Gaede's arrest. Gaede was convicted and sentenced to 33 months in prison in June 1996.<ref name="Guillermo Gaede">{{Cite news|date=June 25, 1996|title=Ex-Intel Engineer Sentenced to Prison Term|work=The New York Times|url=https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E01E0DE1239F936A15755C0A960958260|access-date=July 12, 2007|archive-date=December 17, 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081217020859/http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E01E0DE1239F936A15755C0A960958260|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="Guilty">{{Cite news|date=March 25, 1996|title=Ex-Intel employee pleads guilty – Guillermo Gaede pleads guilty to stealing Intel trade secrets – Industry Legal Issue|work=findarticles.com|publisher=LookSmart, Ltd.|url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EKF/is_n2109_v42/ai_18135525|url-status=dead|access-date=July 12, 2007|archive-url=http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20091001091817/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EKF/is_n2109_v42/ai_18135525|archive-date=October 1, 2009}}</ref>