GPP and ramifications to AMD, AIB's, OEM's and [H]

Status
Not open for further replies.
R

razor1

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
10,120
I have been a long time support of [H] and Kyle as many of you know. And still am.

With the recent GPP program, I can not support Kyle on this particular way of doing things.

I have consulted my corporate attorneys on this matter and they have stated the same things I have stated in the GPP article thread. Not only that, I took it a step further and posted anonymously on a site that asks for lawyer's opinions here

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/...nt=question_legal&utm_campaign=comment_notify

Every single attorney that has responded and I have talked to, have stated irrevocably, by AMD (company B) going to the press prior to any potential lawsuit, it hurts theirs and OEM's chances of litigation. The ramifications can go farther than this as well is my understanding. If there is anything that doesn't align with what is going on with the program, with what Kyle reported, it could even come back to [H], in a really bad way. Kyle must answer this as I don't know if his attorneys were involved with talking with AMD's attorneys prior to the communication of this information.

I don't think they were as Kyle would have stipulated this in his article. If they weren't AMD could categorical deny anything that his article and his research uncovers and legally [H] will be held accountable for anything that comes up along with AMD to a lesser extent.

I applaud Kyle for bringing up this matter and the balls to do it, because its a slippery road. I wish the article could have taken into consideration why a company such as AMD, the potential benefactor of such a suit would come out and try to sway the public prior to any legal action taking place. They have a habit of doing this and I hope it doesn't go down the road that I have stated above because now [H] is on the hook for anything AMD does in this particular matter.

When litigation is concerned, the media is never a friend of the parties involved. The "victim" is also never a goody too shoes either, not when they do things like this.
 
Last edited:
thebufenator said:
Why are you talking to attorneys about this? Do you have a ball in the game?
Click to expand...


No because those posts were deleted in the GPP thread, since everyone there stated I was talking out of my ass and the response to that I told them I will talk to my corporate attorneys to get a definitive answer on this type of situation.
 
You are talking out your ass, let it go and move on, no one cares what Razor1 thinks is legally ok. You would think getting kicked from multiple threads and parts of the forum would be a clue to stop. You always derail a thread by making it about you being right and everyone else being wrong.
 
Gideon said:
You are talking out your ass, let it go and move on, no one cares what Razor1 thinks is legally ok. You would think getting kicked from multiple threads and parts of the forum would be a clue to stop. You always derail a thread by making it about you being right and everyone else being wrong.
Click to expand...

Well, he can't derail this thread, since this is what it's about it?
 
how is there bias when the people I talked to and posted don't even know the companies involved?
 
From the responses on that anonymous post of yours, it just seems that they all say, consult your attorney first.
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
From the responses on that anonymous post of yours, it just seems that they all say, consult your attorney first.
Click to expand...


They have to be in the lead. This is what I stated, AMD must have talked to their attorneys first before they went fishing to the public, and by fishing they don't have enough info to go to trial at least not yet. What my attorneys stated was yeah they should control how the information is dissipated so it doesn't come back and hurt them when the time comes. Since I don't think AMD's attorneys talked to Kyle, their attorneys aren't taking the lead, they are just in the loop to see what is going on and what comes out of it.
 
Ironically or fortuitously in this case, one of the attorneys, used the same thing I was getting at when all this took place in the other thread.

Ex parte injunction (he called it ex parte seizure) can be damaged by going to the press prior to a lawsuit commencing. This is particularly important in such a case because they need to make sure nothing changes after the fact with the program. he wasn't led to saying what he stated, I presented the facts of the article, in general terms, without who was involved.

This will allow AMD to get all the information first hand from OEM's AIB's and nV without any information being changed or modified. There would be no reason to go to the press if they had enough information to do a lawsuit. This also goes for the OEM's, AIB's, and what not, they are right in the middle of this.
 
Last edited:
Dude, your are coming across as a crazy ex-girlfriend.

Yes, going to the press can damage legal action. Then again it can also not damage legal action, lawyers are cunning and you can bet your last dollar that AMD consulted with as good or better lawyers than you have.

It is possible AMD already had everything they need, and also want to cause a media ruckus because that can accomplish things that a lawsuit cannot, particularly if one companies pockets are deep enough to just fund a defense against that action for years.

Lawsuits take 1.5 to 2 years just to get to trial, trail can take an additional 6, add in appeals and its a mess. Nothing is solved quickly with legal action, by the time its done in this case, AMD could be ashes and nVidia would just end up out of pocket some cash in exchange for ruining the competition. Media attention has been show to get quicker results than trials, and trials have been shown time and again to be wholly ineffective against large corporation.

Anyway, I'm sure nothing here is new compared to a 17 page thread, read and understand, or don't. later.
 
Aireoth said:
Yes, going to the press can damage legal action. Then again it can also not damage legal action, lawyers are cunning and you can bet your last dollar that AMD consulted with as good or better lawyers than you have.

It is possible AMD already had everything they need, and also want to cause a media ruckus because that can accomplish things that a lawsuit cannot, particularly if one companies pockets are deep enough to just fund a defense against that action for years.

Lawsuits take 1.5 to 2 years just to get to trial, trail can take an additional 6, add in appeals and its a mess. Nothing is solved quickly with legal action, by the time its done in this case, AMD could be ashes and nVidia would just end up out of pocket some cash in exchange for ruining the competition. Media attention has been show to get quicker results than trials, and trials have been shown time and again to be wholly ineffective against large corporation.

Anyway, I'm sure nothing here is new compared to a 17 page thread, read and understand, or don't. later.
Click to expand...


Why would they go to the public if its was going to damage the case, there is no such thing as creating a ruckus in the media to help their lawsuit, its never looks good at all in the eyes of the judge. judge doesn't care about who has money man, they are supposed to be impartial, that is why they are a judge. Also cases like this the plaintiff, or victim always has leverage above the defendant. By going to the press they lose that leverage.
 
razor1 said:
Why would they go to the public if its was going to damage the case, there is no such thing as creating a ruckus in the media to help their lawsuit, its never looks good at all in the eyes of the judge. judge doesn't care about who has money man, they are supposed to be impartial, that is why they are a judge. Also cases like this the plaintiff, or victim always has leverage above the defendant. By going to the press they lose that leverage.
Click to expand...

You really just don't listen or understand, it is in the post above. 'nuff said.

Edit: Pulled it out for you - Lawsuits take 1.5 to 2 years just to get to trial, trail can take an additional 6, add in appeals and its a mess. Nothing is solved quickly with legal action, by the time its done in this case, AMD could be ashes and nVidia would just end up out of pocket some cash in exchange for ruining the competition. Media attention has been show to get quicker results than trials, and trials have been shown time and again to be wholly ineffective against large corporation.
 
Last edited:
razor1 said:
This will allow AMD to get all the information first hand from OEM's AIB's and nV without any information being changed or modified. There would be no reason to go to the press if they had enough information to do a lawsuit. This also goes for the OEM's, AIB's, and what not, they are right in the middle of this.
Click to expand...
And this is the point I have previously made, which you have decided to ignore. Maybe getting involved is a lawsuit is exactly what they want to avoid, hence taking the route they have.

Also, you assumption above would suggest that AMD does not already have all the information it needs to do so.

So, while I know you think you are 100% correct about anything, but your live of thought does not address all lines of possible motivation, rather only one small avenue.
 
razor1 said:
They have to be in the lead. This is what I stated, AMD must have talked to their attorneys first before they went fishing to the public, and by fishing they don't have enough info to go to trial at least not yet. What my attorneys stated was yeah they should control how the information is dissipated so it doesn't come back and hurt them when the time comes. Since I don't think AMD's attorneys talked to Kyle, their attorneys aren't taking the lead, they are just in the loop to see what is going on and what comes out of it.
Click to expand...
Again, assumptions that you fully understand AMD motivations. And also, it is an assumption that 100% of attorneys view this in the same manner. You refuse to believe that anyone but you have the right legal advice here.
 
Since no damage has been done - no legal case.

So why wouldn't AMD bring to light stuff that could potentially hurt the consumer, them and their partners? Plus 1st amendment gives every right for Kyle and others to voice findings. This fight may not be so much about AMD/RTG as it is with the AIB and OEMs retaining control of their gaming lines how they see fit. I don't see one lawsuit, I see several aiming right at the big N.

If AMD/RTG still has 30% of the gaming brand - that still will hurt a number of AIB/OEMs sells one way or another. The best AMD/RTG can do at this stage is deliver deliver and deliver. Hell they virtually invented HBM2, how to stack etc. Get GloFlo, TSMC or who ever (Intel) making that stuff so they can get the damn show on the road. In this day, GPU's are becoming more important than CPUs, especially at growth rate of sells. HBM2 is not being consumed by phone companies - AMD should have a window here to deliver - but they are not.

In the end this was a very bad move by Nvidia, pissing a lot of folks off. Support should be offered from Nvidia for the ones buying it - not dictated to what kind of support you will get depending if you bow down or not.
 
noko said:
Since no damage has been done - no legal case.

So why wouldn't AMD bring to light stuff that could potentially hurt the consumer, them and their partners? Plus 1st amendment gives every right for Kyle and others to voice findings. This fight may not be so much about AMD/RTG as it is with the AIB and OEMs retaining control of their gaming lines how they see fit. I don't see one lawsuit, I see several aiming right at the big N.

If AMD/RTG still has 30% of the gaming brand - that still will hurt a number of AIB/OEMs sells one way or another. The best AMD/RTG can do at this stage is deliver deliver and deliver. Hell they virtually invented HBM2, how to stack etc. Get GloFlo, TSMC or who ever (Intel) making that stuff so they can get the damn show on the road. In this day, GPU's are becoming more important than CPUs, especially at growth rate of sells. HBM2 is not being consumed by phone companies - AMD should have a window here to deliver - but they are not.

In the end this was a very bad move by Nvidia, pissing a lot of folks off. Support should be offered from Nvidia for the ones buying it - not dictated to what kind of support you will get depending if you bow down or not.
Click to expand...


That is also not what Kyle stated, he stated lawsuits are pending, if he is correct on this end, damages have been done.
 
razor1 said:
That is also not what Kyle stated, he stated lawsuits are pending, if he is correct on this end, damages have been done.
Click to expand...
I would suggest if you are going to say "what Kyle stated," that you attribute the exact quote. I did not say what you are saying above as a statement of fact and to frame it as such is erroneous.
 
razor1 said:
That is also not what Kyle stated, he stated lawsuits are pending, if he is correct on this end, damages have been done.
Click to expand...
That does not mean they are filed yet. No more lawyer speak from me because real lawyers (business ones) will need to address this and since laws have differences from country to country, even state by state I just can't see the forum being very effective on this, you will be talking about a lot of lawyers throughout the world if this program matures and gets widely implemented.
 
Would AMD have done better had they had advance warning in regard to Intel's OEM 'deals' and were able to put that in the public eye for all to see? We'll never really know for sure. AMD had the better product for a while and their corporate masters were fuckwads who kept partying like they were going to stay on the top of the world for all of eternity. Maybe all of the public pressure in the world wouldn't have changed the outcome of AMD vs. Intel.

In today's world of always on social media and allegations being proof nowadays (yeah, that's kinda sarcasm), it's a different ballgame. Not to mention that AMD/RTG, under Lisa Su, is much smarter than they were back then. If you ignore history, as the expression goes, you're most likely to repeat the mistakes of the past. Lisa Su is not ignoring history and she sure as hell doesn't want history to repeat itself.
 
razor1 said:
You stated as fact against my post and I took it as you had more information then you stated in your article, which I can't look at so I can't quote it.

This is what you stated, lawsuits are pending, we will see shortly. or to that effect.

Anyone reading that post will think what I thought, there was more information, that you are privy to that hasn't been released.
Click to expand...
If you are going to type what I said, you had better start putting exact quotes in. You are warned. Yes, you can view it, just log out since we decided to remove your access to FPN after posting 100 times in that thread alone. You learn how not to spam, and you will be allowed access again.
 
noko said:
That does not mean they are filed yet. No more lawyer speak from me because real lawyers (business ones) will need to address this and since laws have differences from country to country, even state by state I just can't see the forum being very effective on this, you will be talking about a lot of lawyers throughout the world if this program matures and gets widely implemented.
Click to expand...


Jurisprudence within a country doesn't change, you can have different steps per state but over all they all have the same theory.
 
Algrim said:
Would AMD have done better had they had advance warning in regard to Intel's OEM 'deals' and were able to put that in the public eye for all to see? We'll never really know for sure. AMD had the better product for a while and their corporate masters were fuckwads who kept partying like they were going to stay on the top of the world for all of eternity. Maybe all of the public pressure in the world wouldn't have changed the outcome of AMD vs. Intel.

In today's world of always on social media and allegations being proof nowadays (yeah, that's kinda sarcasm), it's a different ballgame. Not to mention that AMD/RTG, under Lisa Su, is much smarter than they were back then. If you ignore history, as the expression goes, you're most likely to repeat the mistakes of the past. Lisa Su is not ignoring history and she sure as hell doesn't want history to repeat itself.
Click to expand...

I doubt it will really change their situation, Intel will still come out on top since social media wasn't really prevalent and tbh, your average consumer doesn't give a shit. As much Intel shot AMD in the foot, AMD also shot itself to the other foot.

This is probably how I feel about GPP, while it is scummy on Nvidia part, your average consumer will not give a shit about it as long Nvidia is selling you GPU.
 
razor1 said:
You stated you think that there is, I took it as there must be something there, there is no reason not to think this way
Click to expand...
I did NOT make a statement of fact. You said I did. There is a big reason not to think that way. I am telling you here and now, if you are going to be "saying what I said," you are required to use exact quotes on the forum I own and run or you will be banned.
 
I think the sky is green, and that something has happened to it.

He said something has happened to the sky and its green now.. everyone run...

That is pretty much whats going on here right now..
 
razor1 said:
I'm doing the same thing you are, the facts I know are real, are how court proceedings take place, based on what I know your opinion on the facts you read don't have bearing if the things I stated haven't been done yet. I don't see you ever going out on a limb like that, so that surprises me.

I will quote you properly from now on and did so in my response.
Click to expand...
"I think" qualifies it as a statement of opinion, not a statement of fact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top