Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!cica!iuvax!purdue!haven!mimsy!mojo!SYSMGR@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: AMD vs. Intel Arbitration
Message-ID: <0093E147.DAED9F80@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU>
Date: 12 Oct 90 16:40:30 GMT
References: <1990Oct11.214112.1392@mozart.amd.com>
Sender: news@eng.umd.edu (The News System)
Reply-To: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Organization: The U. of MD, CP, CAD lab
Lines: 10

In article <1990Oct11.214112.1392@mozart.amd.com>, brian@positron.amd.com (Brian McMinn) writes:
>Partial results of the arbitration between AMD and Intel over the
>breach of the 1982 Technology Agreement were announced today:
>
>Notable among the [issues where AMD failed to make its case] was the
>Arbitrator's ruling that Intel had no obligation to accept five
>specific products either proposed of developed by AMD.

This does NOT answer the $64000 question: Does AMD have the right to make the
'386 ?