Can you explain what you tried so say with that?

Customer needs don't really matter in cases where monopolist (ab)uses the law to kill competition. That's the MAIN reason why monopolies are problematic.

The "required" in that sentence should be read strictly: some customers, mainly governmental, wouldn't have bought Intel chips in the first place without access to alternative suppliers (AMD and previously VIA). Intel had to give in.

I read GP to mean that Intel had strong incentive to cooperate in order to make the initial sale. That’s where the customer need was relevant.

Neither company were like they are now back then. Intel needed a second supplier for their chips because nobody trusted manufacturing from a single source provider.

That wasn't the case. Their customers were the military. The second sourcing was required if they wanted DoD contracts.

This article is not about that. This article is about the AMD Am9080, which was a unlicensed clone of the Intel 8080.

The licensing deals that legitimized AMD's unlicensed clones came later.