Intel Corp and the European Commission took divergent views on Monday of the Commission's release of the 517-page decision that underpins its 1.06 billion euro fine on the chip maker.

The Commission found in May that Intel used illegal means to shut out rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. On Monday, it released the decision. Here are some of the written statements Intel issued in response to the document and the Commission's views:

The European Commission release was accompanied by a brief press memo excerpting portions of the decision. It for the first time quoted from internal memos from major computer makers. Those memos helped form the basis of the decision.

Intel Statement: There is nothing new here. Later, a spokesman said that could be changed to there was nothing surprising to us. Intel has had the decision for months.

One issue was whether Intel conditioned generous rebates on sharply limiting chips from AMD.

The European Commission quoted Hewlett Packard as saying in a statement to the Commission that it had agreed to purchase at least 95 percent of its business desktop system from Intel ... as a way of gaining credits.

It also quoted emails from NEC, Lenovo and Acer making similar points.

Intel Statement: When Intel did offer discounts in the form of rebates, it did not offer them on the condition that customers purchase all or most of their microprocessors from Intel (as the Commission found) nor did Intel condition rebates on a customer not using AMD microprocessors.

The European Commission statement quoted emails it attributed to executives from Lenovo and Dell. It also quoted a submission from HP to the Commission. In addition, it quoted from a memo from an Intel executive describing Intel's interaction with Acer senior executives.

Intel Statement: The Commission relied heavily on speculation found in emails from lower level employees that did not participate in the negotiation of the relevant agreements if they favored the Commission's case.

The European Commission said Intel and clients generally did not write anti-competitive terms into agreements: Intel generally sought to conceal the conditions in its arrangements with PC manufacturers. The Commission said Dell said there was no written agreement but that the agreement was instead the subject of constant oral negotiations and agreement.

The Commission said there was a written agreement with HP, but the relevant conditions remained unwritten.

Intel Statement: The Commission acknowledged in its report that it has no written evidence of this [the illegal deals] in the form of actual contracts.

(Reporting by David Lawsky; editing by Andre Grenon)

Dell Vs Intel