Tag Archives: Business

Live Nation settlement avoids breakup with Ticketmaster

Posted on by

To keep Ticketmaster, Live Nation is going to have to make some major changes. As first reported by Politico, Live Nation reached a settlement with the Department of Justice in its antitrust case that accused the live entertainment giant of monopolistic practices. Live Nation will reportedly pay at least $200 million in damages to states that were part of the lawsuit filed in May 2024, but avoid selling off Ticketmaster.

Live Nation will also be required to make a few changes to its business practices. According to NBC News, Ticketmaster, a subsidiary of Live Nation, will be required to create a "standalone ticketing system" that allows third-party competitors like SeatGeek and Eventbrite to sell tickets on.

The settlement aims to loosen some of Live Nation's control over venues as well. According to NBC News, the company will have to divest up to 13 amphitheaters and be prohibited from retaliating against venues that choose another ticket seller over Ticketmaster.

The settlement comes less than a week after the case went to trial. While the matter may be concluded with the Justice Department, many of the states' attorneys general who were part of the lawsuit will be continuing their legal action separately.

"The settlement recently announced with the U.S. Department of Justice fails to address the monopoly at the center of this case and would benefit Live Nation at the expense of consumers," New York State Attorney General Letitia James wrote in a press release. "We will continue our lawsuit to protect consumers and restore fair competition to the live entertainment industry." 26 other attorneys general signed onto continuing the lawsuit with James.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/music/live-nation-settlement-avoids-breakup-with-ticketmaster-155031214.html?src=rss

Google reportedly muzzles Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney until 2032

Posted on by

Epic Games’ courtroom battle with Google is over, but it’s reportedly going to affect how its CEO can speak about the tech giant for years for years to come. According to The Verge, part of the settlement terms Epic had signed has a clause stating that Epic and Sweeney will have to speak positively about Google’s competitiveness and app store operations going forward. “Epic believes that the Google and Android platform, with the changes in this term sheet, are procompetitive and a model for app store / platform operations, and will make good faith efforts to advocate for the same,” the clause reportedly reads.

Further, The Verge says the settlement terms between the companies will expire five years after Google is done rolling out changes to its service fees. Since Google expects to finish implementing changes worldwide by September 30, 2027, Sweeney can’t speak negatively about the app store until after September 30, 2032.

Sweeney is one of the most vocal critic of how Apple and Google operate their app stores, which had led to several lawsuits between the companies. He once called both Apple and Google “gangster-style businesses” that will “always continue” to be engaged in illegal practices and just pay the fine afterwards. Epic Games filed a lawsuit against Google in 2020, accusing it of illegal monopoly on app distribution and in-app billing services for Android devices. In 2023, Google lost the lawsuit. It then lost its appeal two years later, before the companies reached a settlement in November 2025. On March 4 this year, Google officially scrapped the 30 percent cut it takes from Play Store transactions, lowering it to 20 percent and even to 15 percent in some cases.

In response to the Google’s decision, Epic Games is bringing back Fortnite to the Play Store worldwide. “Google is opening up Android all the way with robust support for competing stores, competing payments, and a better deal for all developers. So, we've settled all of our disputes worldwide. THANKS GOOGLE!” Sweeney posted on X. Based on the clause in their settlement, future statements from the CEO about Google will need to carry a similar tone, in the next few years at least.

Update, March 5 2026, 2:13PM ET: Epic reached out to Engadget to share an important clarification: “Criticizing Google is fair game on topics not related to app store distribution/ fees,” the company wrote on X, “Epic and Google agreed to not disparage only on topics about the settlement.” We’ve updated the copy of our story to reflect the specificity of the non-disparagement agreement, and look forward to the ways in which Epic will certainly exercise its remaining capacity to be critical of Google.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/google-reportedly-muzzles-epic-games-ceo-tim-sweeney-until-2032-105501644.html?src=rss

Big tech companies agree to not ruin your electric bill with AI data centers

Posted on by

Today the White House announced that several major players in tech and AI have agreed to steps that will keep electricity costs from rising due to data centers. Under this Ratepayer Protection Pledge, companies are agreeing to practices that are intended to protect residents from seeing higher electricity costs as more and more businesses create power-hungry data centers. Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle and xAI have all apparently signed on. A few of the participants — Amazon, Google and Meta — had conveniently timed press releases patting themselves on the back for their participation and touting whatever other policies they have for mitigating the negative impacts of data center construction.

The main provisions of the federal pledge have tech companies agreeing to "build, bring, or buy the new generation resources and electricity needed to satisfy their new energy demands, paying the full cost of those resources." It also claims they will pay for any needed power infrastructure upgrades and operate under separate rate structures for power that will see payments made whether or not the business uses that electricity.

The pledge doesn't appear to be any form of binding agreement and there's no discussion of enforcement or a penalty for companies that don't honor the stipulated provisions. It also doesn't address any of the other impacts data centers and AI development might be having, either on local communities, on other utilities and resources, or on access to critical computing elements like RAM.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/big-tech-companies-agree-to-not-ruin-your-electric-bill-with-ai-data-centers-230102956.html?src=rss

Big tech companies agree to not ruin your electric bill with AI data centers

Posted on by

Today the White House announced that several major players in tech and AI have agreed to steps that will keep electricity costs from rising due to data centers. Under this Ratepayer Protection Pledge, companies are agreeing to practices that are intended to protect residents from seeing higher electricity costs as more and more businesses create power-hungry data centers. Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle and xAI have all apparently signed on. A few of the participants — Amazon, Google and Meta — had conveniently timed press releases patting themselves on the back for their participation and touting whatever other policies they have for mitigating the negative impacts of data center construction.

The main provisions of the federal pledge have tech companies agreeing to "build, bring, or buy the new generation resources and electricity needed to satisfy their new energy demands, paying the full cost of those resources." It also claims they will pay for any needed power infrastructure upgrades and operate under separate rate structures for power that will see payments made whether or not the business uses that electricity.

The pledge doesn't appear to be any form of binding agreement and there's no discussion of enforcement or a penalty for companies that don't honor the stipulated provisions. It also doesn't address any of the other impacts data centers and AI development might be having, either on local communities, on other utilities and resources, or on access to critical computing elements like RAM.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/big-tech-companies-agree-to-not-ruin-your-electric-bill-with-ai-data-centers-230102956.html?src=rss

The Supreme Court doesn’t care if you want to copyright your AI-generated art

Posted on by

As AI-generated artwork becomes more commonplace, it still won't be able to be copyrighted, according to US courts. On Monday, the US Supreme Court declined to hear a case about whether an artwork generated with the help of AI can be copyrighted. The refusal means that a lower court's decision to reject the copyright request will stand.

The case dates back to 2018 when Stephen Thaler applied for a copyright of an artwork called A Recent Entrance to Paradise. Unlike using ChatGPT or Midjourney, Thaler, a computer scientist, created an AI system that generated the artwork in question. However, the US Copyright Office rejected his application in 2022 on the grounds that it wasn't made by a human author. Thaler sought appeals at higher courts, but ultimately had to escalate the case to the Supreme Court after both a federal judge in Washington and the US Court of Appeals ruled against him.

With a refusal from the highest court in the US, it's unlikely Thaler's case can continue. The US Supreme Court could always hear a related case in the future, but Thaler's lawyers said, "even ⁠if it later overturns the Copyright Office’s test in another case, it will be too late," adding that the decision will have negatively impacted the creative industry during "critically important years." It's worth noting that Thaler also filed applications to the US Patent and Trademark Office for AI-generated inventions, which were rejected for similar reasons.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/the-supreme-court-doesnt-care-if-you-want-to-copyright-your-ai-generated-art-171849407.html?src=rss

Sony faces a $2.7 billion antitrust lawsuit in the UK

Posted on by

Another major antitrust lawsuit has launched in the UK. This time its against Sony, which could be on the hook for almost £2 billion ($2.7 billion) for overcharging PlayStation users. 

A class action case for about 12.2 million users argues that Sony "occupies a dominant position in relation to the digital distribution of PlayStation games and in-game content and that it has been unfairly charging its UK customers too much for digital games and in-game content purchased through the PlayStation Store."

It argues that Sony "has a near monopoly" on add-on content and digital games through the PlayStation store, allowing it to set the prices and take a 30 percent commission.

The class action encompasses anyone in the UK who owned a PlayStation console and purchased digital games or made in-game purchases through the PlayStation store between August 19, 2016 and February 12, 2026. It's being run as an opt-out lawsuit, so anyone meeting the criteria can qualify without taking any action. If the lawsuit is successful then each person could receive about £162 ($217). 

Sony has argued that allowing downloads from third-party stores could bring security and privacy risks, according to the Financial Times. It further states that the digital sales commission makes up profits lost for selling their consoles with minimal profit. 

This lawsuit follows the success of a similar class action decided in October. The UK's Competition Appeal Tribunal found that Apple had been abusing its dominant market position and overcharging App Store users. In December, Apple filed an appeal against the £1.5 billion ($2 billion) fine. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/sony-faces-a-27-billion-antitrust-lawsuit-in-the-uk-114113889.html?src=rss

Google and OpenAI employees sign open letter in ‘solidarity’ with Anthropic

Posted on by

Hundreds of employees at Google and OpenAI have signed an open letter urging their companies to stand with Anthropic in its standoff with the Pentagon over military applications for AI tools like Claude.

The letter, titled “We Will Not Be Divided,” calls on the leadership of both companies to “put aside their differences and stand together to continue to refuse the Department of War’s current demands for permission to use our models for domestic mass surveillance and autonomously killing people without human oversight.” These are two lines that Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has said should not be crossed by his or any other AI company.

As of publication, the letter has over 450 signatures, almost 400 of which come from Google employees and the rest from OpenAI. Currently, roughly 50 percent of all participants have chosen to attach their names to the cause, with the rest remaining anonymous. All are verified as current employees of these companies. The original organizers of the letter aren’t Google or OpenAI employees; they say are unaffiliated with any AI company, political party or advocacy group.

The open letter is the latest development in the saga between Anthropic and US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who threatened to label the company a “supply chain risk” if it did not agree to withdraw certain guardrails for classified work. The Pentagon has also been in talks with Google and OpenAI about using their models for classified work, with xAI coming on board earlier this week. The letter argues the government is "trying to divide each company with fear that the other will give in.”

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman told his employees on Friday that the ChatGPT maker will draw the same red lines as Anthropic, according to an internal memo seen by Axios. He told CNBC on the same day that he doesn't "personally think the Pentagon should be threatening DPA against these companies."

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/google-and-openai-employees-sign-open-letter-in-solidarity-with-anthropic-194957274.html?src=rss

Meta sues advertisers in Brazil and China over ‘celeb bait’ scams

Posted on by

Meta has sued the people and groups behind three scam operations that used images and deepfakes of celebrities to lure users to scam websites. According to the company, the three entities were based in China and Brazil and targeted people in the US, Japan and other countries. The ads promoted fraudulent investment schemes and fake health products.

Meta said that it had filed lawsuits against several people in Brazil who promoted fake or unapproved healthcare products and online courses promoting them. The company also sued a China-based entity it says used ads featuring celebrities "as part of a larger fraud scheme that lured people into joining so-called investment groups." The company didn't provide details on how many ads these groups had run on Facebook, how many social media users had seen or interacted with the ads or how long the scammers had been operating on the platform.

So-called "celeb bait" ads have been a long-running issue for the company. Engadget has previously documented celeb bait scams on Facebook, including ones that frequently use Elon Musk and Fox News personalities to hawk fake cures for diabetes. The Oversight Board has also criticized the company for not doing enough to combat such scams. In its update, Meta says that "because scam ads are designed to look real, they’re not always easy to detect." The company also noted that it has now enrolled "more than 500,000" celebrities and public figures into its facial recognition system that's meant to automatically detect scam ads using the faces of famous people. 

Meta's handling of scammy advertisers has come under increased scrutiny in recent months after Reuters reported that researchers at the company at one point estimated that as much as 10 percent of its ad revenue could be coming from scams and banned products. The fact that Meta has made billions of dollars from problematic advertisers has also caused the company to be slow to take action against repeat offenders.

In addition to the groups behind the celeb bait ads, Meta says that it's upgraded its ability to detect scam ads that use cloaking, which has at times hindered its internal review systems. The company also sued a Vietnam-based advertiser it says used scam ads to hawk "deeply discounted items from well-known brands," including Longchamp.

Meta also took legal action against eight former "Meta Business Partners," who promoted services that would "un-ban" or other "account restoration services." The company says it will "consider taking additional legal action, including litigation, if they don’t comply" with cease and desist orders.

Update, February 26, 2026, 1:16PM PT: This story was updated to specify that Meta’s internal estimates around ad revenue included scams and banned products.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/meta-sues-advertisers-in-brazil-and-china-over-celeb-bait-scams-190000268.html?src=rss

NY AG: Valve’s loot boxes can get kids hooked on gambling

Posted on by

New York Attorney General Letitia James has accused Valve of promoting illegal gambling through its video games in a lawsuit filed by her office. According to the AG’s announcement, her office conducted an investigation and had concluded that Valve enabled gambling by enticing users to pay for a chance at rare items from loot boxes in Counter-Strike 2, Team Fortress 2 and Dota 2. In the lawsuit, the New York AG stressed that Valve’s loot boxes are “particularly pernicious,” because the games are popular among children and teenagers.

The lawsuit described the loot box model, which requires a player to open a mystery chest for the possibility of winning rare items, as “quintessential gambling.” It argued that people introduced to gambling at an early age are at a significantly higher risk of developing gambling addictions later on, based on research. In addition, it explained that gambling is mostly illegal in New York.

Players have to pay for chests or boxes and the keys to be able to open them in Valve’s games, and the company has reportedly sold billions of dollars’ worth of keys for Counter-Strike alone. The lawsuit said that Valve has made tens of millions of dollars in fees from the sale of virtual items on the Steam Community Market, as well. In addition to being able to sell items on Steam for funds directly credited to their Steam Wallet, players can also sell on third-party marketplaces for cash.

According to James’ office, Valve facilitates and even assists third-party marketplaces in their operations, based on its investigation. Engadget has asked Valve for a statement about the lawsuit, but we have yet to hear back. However, the company previously denied being involved with third-party marketplaces that allow the sales of its game items for real-world money. In a response to an inquiry by the Danish Gambling Authority, Valve explained that those third-party websites create sock puppet accounts to sell and receive items on Steam in exchange for cash. “[T]his behavior is in violation of our terms of service,” Valve said.

The lawsuit also pointed out that there’s a huge market for Counter-Strike skins and referenced a Bloomberg article from 2025, which reported that the market for those skins had already surpassed $4.3 billion. As an example of in-game items sold for real money, it cited the sale of a Counter-Strike 2 AK-47 skin in 2024 for $1 million. The Attorney General’s Office wants the court to stop Valve from violating New York laws, to give up money it allegedly earned from illegal activities and to pay a fine three times what it allegedly earned from illegal business practices.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/ny-ag-valves-loot-boxes-can-get-kids-hooked-on-gambling-122503556.html?src=rss

xAI’s trade secret lawsuit against OpenAI has been dismissed

Posted on by

OpenAI has successfully convinced the court to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Elon Musk’s xAI, accusing the company of stealing its trade secrets. In her decision, US District Judge Rita F. Lin wrote that xAI’s complaint “does not point to any misconduct by OpenAI” and instead attributes all listed misconducts to its eight former employees who “ left for OpenAI at around the same time.”

Lin said that xAI accused two of its former employees of stealing its source code before leaving at a time when they were already speaking to an OpenAI recruiter. However, the company didn’t say if the recruiter told those former employees to do so. xAI’s lawsuit also accuses two other former employees of keeping their work chats on their devices even after leaving, another of refusing to provide certifications related to confidential information after his departure, and another of unsuccessfully trying to access xAI hiring and datacenter optimization information when he was already working for OpenAI.

“Notably absent are allegations about the conduct of OpenAI itself,” the judge noted. xAI didn’t include any information that directly accuses OpenAI of making those employees steal its trade secrets. It also didn’t include allegations that those former employees used any stolen trade secrets after they were already working for OpenAI. To be precise, OpenAI’s motion for dismissal was granted with leave to amend, so the lawsuit may not be completely over just yet. That means xAI can still file an amended complaint addressing what the judge wrote in her decision until March 17, 2026.

OpenAI and xAI have a longstanding feud, and this is just one of the several lawsuits between the two companies. In fact, Musk has an ongoing complaint against OpenAI and Microsoft, accusing the former of violating its nonprofit status. Musk, who was an early funder of OpenAI, is now asking the company for $79 billion to $134 billion in damages from “wrongful gains.”

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/ai/xais-trade-secret-lawsuit-against-openai-has-been-dismissed-101912599.html?src=rss