It can also be said that Intel’s practices were deemed illegal not only in United States but in Japan and South Korea as well. The company faced a number of lawsuits and fines that found it in violation of antitrust law which follows in close coordination with the Sherman Act. Intel’s guilt can be ascertained for the fact that some of the lawsuits were not fought in courts and instead the company chose to make huge payments in settlements. A history of its lawsuits has been given in the section before (Haemer 35). The company has been found guilty of manipulating the market according the Sherman Act. Intel’s market was not only limited to United States but reached far and wide across the world. Also, the example of Dell wasn’t the only case where Intel continued to make controversial rebate payments. It also tried to influence other major companies such as IBM and HP. Though, the companies refused to give exclusive rights to Intel, they did agree upon specifying a certain amount of purchases that would be made from AMD under the rebate payment conditions. Thus, Intel was adamant on barring AMD from all of its rebate payments. The companies were not being rewarded for buying the Intel microprocessors but were in fact being rewarded for their refusal to purchase any other product. It is also important to note, that the companies were not limited with any number of purchases. They could buy any number of products as long as the products were bought from Intel. The behavior continued to persist. Intel had sufficient financial power to give relief to companies such as Dell who complained of reduced sales. The rebate payments than acted as a means to keep the company from falling into financial distress. Under these payments, it also appeared as if Dell’s superior position in the market was due to its high performance computer systems. Thus, the customers were deceived of the actual facts and were denied of their right to free choice. (Haemer 35)
可以说，英特尔的做法是在美国被视为非法而不只是在日本和韩国，以及。公司面临着一系列的诉讼和罚款，发现它在反垄断法：在与舍曼的行为违反了密切协调。英特尔的罪行可确定的事实，一些不曾在法院的诉讼，而该公司选择在定居点做出巨大的款项。其诉讼的历史已在部分之前（haemer 35）。公司被判操纵市场按舍曼法。英特尔的市场不仅限于美国，但远和广泛的世界各地。同时，戴尔还例不唯一的情况下，英特尔继续作出有争议的回扣。它也试图与其他大公司如IBM和惠普的影响。不过，该公司拒绝透露英特尔的独家权利，他们也同意在指定的商品，将由AMD回扣支付条件下一定量。因此，英特尔坚持除非AMD从所有的回扣。该公司没有购买英特尔微处理器的奖励，但实际上是被他们拒绝购买其他产品的奖励。需要注意的是，这些公司都不局限于任何数量的购买。他们可以购买任何数量的产品，只要产品是从英特尔买的。行为继续下去。英特尔有足够的财力来解救公司如戴尔抱怨销售减少。回扣支付比作为一种手段来保持公司陷入财务困境。在这些款项，也好像戴尔在市场上的优势地位是由于其高性能的计算机系统。因此，消费者受骗的事实，否认他们的自由选择权。（haemer 35）
