EU Opens Antitrust Probe of Broadcom, Imposes Interim Measures to Halt Non-competitive Practices
The Commission said its interim action would halt activity that could cause irreparable harm to Broadcom's competition.
June 26, 2019 at 12:50 PM
3 minute read
The European Commission has opened an antitrust investigation into whether U.S. semiconductor maker Broadcom is restricting competition through exclusivity contracts. The Commission is also planning to impose measures to end possible anticompetitive practices in the TV and modem chipset markets, while it carries out its investigation.
"TV set-top boxes and modems are part of our daily lives, for both work and for leisure," said Margrethe Vestager, the EU's antitrust head. "We suspect that Broadcom, a major supplier of components for these devices, has put in place contractual restrictions to exclude its competitors from the market."
Vestager said such restrictions would prevent Broadcom's customers and final consumers from reaping the benefits of choice and innovation. "We also intend to order Broadcom to halt its behaviour while our investigation proceeds, to avoid any risk of serious and irreparable harm to competition," she added.
In response to the Commission's announcement, Broadcom said in an SEC filing today that the allegations are unfounded. "Broadcom believes it complies with European competition rules and that the Commission's concerns are without merit," the company stated. "Broadcom will respond to the Commission regarding its objections and proposed interim measures. Broadcom will continue to cooperate with the Commission and looks forward to discussing procedural and substantive matters with the Commission over the coming weeks and months."
Broadcom is the world's largest designer, developer and provider of integrated circuits for wired communication devices. It is the market leader in a number of sectors, including the chipsets combining electronic circuits that constitute the 'brain' of a set-top box or modem, front-end chips, and wifi chipsets.
The Commission suspects that Broadcom may have committed anticompetitive practices, including setting exclusive purchasing obligations, granting rebates or other advantages depending on exclusivity or minimum purchase requirements, product bundling, abusive IP-related strategies, and deliberately degrading interoperability between Broadcom products and other products.
In order to prevent irreparable harm to the market for these products, the Commission has set out its case for temporary measures that would come into force while it completes its investigation. The measures would order Broadcom to suspend all contracts that could have an anticompetitive effect. These would apply in the markets for TV set-top boxes and modems, front-end chips and wifi chipsets.
Broadcom has two weeks to respond to the Commission's charges. The Commission will then decide whether to impose the measures.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBig Law Firms Help Vodafone-Three Merger Clear Major Competition Hurdle
Gilbert + Tobin and King & Wood Mallesons Advise on $3.2bn Australian Gold Deal
2 minute readClyde & Co Australia Hit By Another Major Defection as 16 Lawyers Depart
2 minute readKirkland & Ellis Client Cerberus Ordered to Fork Over €400M
Trending Stories
- 1CooperSurgical Class Action Survives Motion to Dismiss
- 2Lawyers Weigh 'Right to Disconnect' During Remote Work
- 3SEC Commissioner Uyeda Predicts Eased Crypto Enforcement Under Next Chair
- 4How Latham & Watkins Is Using Online Training to Expand the Legal Pipeline
- 5New York DMV Overhauls Its Points System
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250