Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 13th Nov 2012 22:24 UTC
Permalink for comment 542478
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/16/13 9:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/15/13 22:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/14/13 18:22 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
Unless someone does a reverse triangular merger, whereby the purchaser creates a shell subsidiary that purchases AMD and then merges the subsidiary into AMD. In this construction AMD becomes a wholly owned subsidiary, but it survives as a business entity and all non-transferable assets endure.
If the Intel - AMD licensing agreements don't have specific verbiage about this scenario, someone could buy AMD and keep the x86 licenses intact.
It's the same trick Attachmate used to acquire Novell and keep Novell intact.