Legal Settlements
|
12 Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dec. 31, 2011
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Legal Settlements [Abstract] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Legal Settlements |
NOTE 11: Legal Settlements SGI (Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc.) v. ATI and AMD, Case No.06-C-0611 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin On April 18, 2011, the parties entered into a confidential Settlement and License Agreement that resolved this litigation matter for an immaterial amount and that provides immunity under all Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc. (GPHI) patents for alleged infringement by AMD products, including components, software and designs. On April 26, 2011, the Court entered an order granting the parties' agreed motion for dismissal and final judgment. Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc. (GPHI) v. Nintendo, Acer, Sony, Apple, and Toshiba, Case No. 10-CV-08655 in the Southern District of New York Under the confidential terms of the Settlement and License Agreement, GPHI notified the defendants that the Settlement and License Agreement (as described above) entered into by AMD and GPHI immunizes the defendants from GPHI's allegations of infringement as to AMD graphics products and designs in that case and requested the defendants' agreement to the joint dismissal of the claims and counterclaims asserted in this litigation matter. The defendants agreed to joint dismissal. Accordingly, on July 22, 2011, the case was terminated. Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc. (GPHI) v. Dell, Alienware, Lenovo, Gateway, and Hewlett-Packard, Case No. 10-CV-00992 in the District of Delaware Under the confidential terms of the Settlement and License Agreement, GPHI notified the defendants that the Settlement and License Agreement (as described above) entered into by AMD and GPHI immunizes the defendants from GPHI's allegations of infringement as to AMD graphics products and designs in that case and requested the defendants' agreement to the joint dismissal of the claims and counterclaims asserted in this litigation matter. The defendants agreed to joint dismissal. Accordingly, on May 2, 2011, the case was terminated. Samsung Settlement In the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company entered into a Patent License and Settlement Agreement with Samsung to end all outstanding legal disputes related to pending patent litigation between the Company and Samsung. Pursuant to this agreement, all claims between the parties were dismissed with prejudice and Samsung agreed to pay the Company $283 million less any withholding taxes not to exceed a maximum rate of 16.5%. The Company received the first payment of $119 million (which represents $143 million less withholding taxes) in December 2010. The remaining amount of $117 million (which represents $140 million less withholding taxes) was paid in two equal installments in May 2011 and in November 2011. In addition, pursuant to the settlement agreement, Samsung granted to the Company, and the Company granted to Samsung, non-exclusive, royalty-free licenses to all patents and patent applications for ten years after the effective date of the Agreement to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise dispose of certain semiconductor- and electronic-related products anywhere in the world. This settlement encompassed all patent litigation and disputes between the parties. At the time the Company entered into the Agreement, it did not have any future obligations that it was required to perform in order to earn this settlement payment. Accordingly, the Company recognized the entire settlement amount in its 2010 operating results.
Intel Settlement In the fourth quarter of 2009, Intel Corporation and the Company entered into an agreement to end all outstanding legal disputes between the Company and Intel including antitrust litigation and patent cross license disputes. Under the terms of the agreement:
This settlement encompasses all past antitrust litigation and disputes between the Company and Intel. At the time the Company entered into the agreement, it did not have any future obligations that the Company would need to perform to earn this settlement payment. That is, the patent cross license agreement represents fully paid up licenses by both the Company and Intel for which no future payment or delivery is required. Accordingly, the Company recognized the entire settlement amount in its 2009 operating results. |