An Idea for A Merger and Acquisition

[TerryMathews]

I'm not agreeing with you, not indulging in urban speak today. What you don't see or refuse to see is the word "breach" in that sentence. Yes? Thank you.

Second point. Do you understand that the breach would have occurred before actual acquisition? In that case, you go to 5.2(a), 5.2(d), and perhaps 5.2(e) in the instance of a bankruptcy.

So, don't jump the gun. AMD as a company must satisfy certain terms with Intel before it can be bought. AMD cannot offer the x86 license up for sale through acquisition by a third party because that immediately renders AMD in breach and strips it of all IPs and licenses, rendering the entire exercise pointless.

No, you're right. AMD cannot sell its license. I never said it could.

AMD can be bought as a whole, which does not violate 5.2(a) and instead invokes 5.2(c).

Furthermore, my original point was that US Bankruptcy Court can modify this agreement to preserve value for creditors. That point still stands.

Find one place where I said AMD could sell its license. You can't because I didn't.

And LOL @ "urban speak". If you think my post was "urban speak" then clearly you don't get out of your mom's basement very often.

 

[Zucker2k]

No, you're right. AMD cannot sell its license. I never said it could.

AMD can be bought as a whole, which does not violate 5.2(a) and instead invokes 5.2(c).

Furthermore, my original point was that US Bankruptcy Court can modify this agreement to preserve value for creditors. That point still stands.

Find one place where I said AMD could sell its license. You can't because I didn't.

And LOL @ "urban speak". If you think my post was "urban speak" then clearly you don't get out of your mom's basement very often.

Sigh!

5.2(c): Subject to the terms of, and as further set forth in, Sections 5.2(d) and 5.2(e), this Agreement shall automatically terminate as a whole upon the consummation of a Change of Control of either Party.

Does the bolded mean anything to you? You have to look at both 5.2(d) and 5.2(e) and in the scenario the OP depicted AMD will be in breach (5.2(a)), and there, 5.2(d) spells out what would happen to the terminated Licensing party and the non-terminated Licensing party. Idontcare is right! To say "AMD can be bought as a whole, which does not violate 5.2(a) and instead invokes 5.2(c)," really says it all. You're choosing to ignore important caveats. AMD cannot be bought whole, they can be bought sans crossed license IPs and the x86 license.

It's clear you're misunderstanding my posts; that piece about my mother's basement is funny. Look, the word ditto has more than the urban speak meaning of "I agree." Besides, even if I did, I'll be right, because you misunderstood my ditto to mean that "acquisition" is in 5.2c, which is true right? But in agreeing with you, I was also reaffirming my earlier point that "breach" is in 5.2(a). ;-)

 

[TerryMathews]

Sigh!

5.2(c): Subject to the terms of, and as further set forth in, Sections 5.2(d) and 5.2(e), this Agreement shall automatically terminate as a whole upon the consummation of a Change of Control of either Party.

Does the bolded mean anything to you? You have to look at both 5.2(d) and 5.2(e) and in the scenario the OP depicted AMD will be in breach (5.2(a)), and there, 5.2(d) spells out what would happen to the terminated Licensing party and the non-terminated Licensing party. Idontcare is right! To say "AMD can be bought as a whole, which does not violate 5.2(a) and instead invokes 5.2(c)," really says it all. You're choosing to ignore important caveats. AMD cannot be bought whole, they can be bought sans crossed license IPs and the x86 license.

It's clear you're misunderstanding my posts; that piece about my mother's basement is funny. Look, the word ditto has more than the urban speak meaning of "I agree." Besides, even if I did, I'll be right, because you misunderstood my ditto to mean that "acquisition" is in 5.2c, which is true right? But in agreeing with you, I was also reaffirming my earlier point that "breach" is in 5.2(a). ;-)

Well, I don't agree with your interpretation. The way things are heading, this won't be academic and we will get to find out whether you or I are correct, and I think sooner rather than later.

 

[Lepton87]

IMHO AMD CPU division is in its death kneel, their big core business already in coma. No further big core CPUs are planned beyond Excavator and I suspect even excavator might not see the light of the day, many engineers working on EX left the company. (I believe we have one in our forums who did just that) no one wants X86 license anyway, a whole of a lot of companies have it and don't ever use it. It's a shame that ATi might be a casualty in all of this. I wish some company with loads of cash bought out ATI after it's been spun off and gave NV a solid beating.