Public statements
It would be a lot easier for the rest of us to form an opinion on whether the formation of TFC violates the cross licensing agreement if the details of it were in the public domain. Mulloy told us that the only version of it in the public domain is heavily redacted (i.e. bits removed).
A search of the web revealed this document; we were unable to find a copy on AMD's website. If that is the document in question it clearly is heavily redacted. One of Intel's issues is with AMD's refusal to publish it in full.
"AMD's filings of the agreement are redacted. If AMD doesn't agree to make them public then Intel can't make its own public," said Mulloy. "If they make public statements that there are no problems with the license agreement then let's discuss it in public."
You can see Intel's point. AMD has decided to form a new company - TFC - that it will be a minority owner of and which won't be able to make decisions without the consent of majority owner ATIC. And yet it wants to transfer existing agreements to it.
Mulloy referred us to the original Master Transaction Agreement, published when the split was first announced last October, and observed: "ATIC has rights over the settlement of the antitrust litigation. TFC has the right to approve in advance any settlement."
So not only is Intel claiming to be acting to protect the ownership of its patents but it also has an eye on the eventual resolution of AMD's antitrust litigation against it and is apparently concerned by the addition of a third party into the mix.
