I guess so, but given how the article is worded, what Intel did was a kick back. Even if it did not hamper competition, defending their actions is pretty ridiculous. I don't see why if as a country we proclaim it to be illegal for people to do it why companies engaging in it is any better.From what I've heard anti-trust laws are vague: you can't "unreasonably exclude firms from the market or significantly impair their ability to compete".
"If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu
For example, plastic molding companies won't make you a design unless you order a specific amount. Though you can order less, the more you order provides significantly cheaper prices per product. Technically this would qualify as a "kickback" but its normal business practice as its expensive to produce a mold and inexpensive to produce the product once the mold is created. Therefore, the plastic company will charge less per product if a customer orders a greater bulk.
This type of business dealing is pretty universal. Its cheaper to make in bulk then to custom make orders or have an unsteady demand. But smaller companies can view this as unfair.
Though some of the things Intel purportedly did cannot be justified and it is probably why they are being so heavily fined.