In his ruling, the federal judge said that antitrust laws don’t apply to the AI overviews of news stories provided for articles searched on Google.

“Plaintiffs have pleaded only that they have an ‘expectation’ that Google will send them search ​traffic if they make their content available for free,” Mehta wrote. “But an expectation is not an agreement. It is simply how a general search engine works.”

Penske Media Corporation, which owns entertainment trades The Hollywood Reporter, Deadline and Variety as well as other publications like Rolling Stone, Gold Derby, Billboard, IndieWire and Artforum, is one of several news organizations that have sounded the alarm about the negative impact that AI overviews of articles have had on their business. Many websites have faced a drastic downturn in web traffic over recent years, arguing that Google providing AI overviews of articles has depleted clicks into their ad- and subscription-supported reporting. In the suit, PMC alleged that it has lost revenue from the new practice.

When the lawsuit was originally filed in 2025, PMC argued that Google is unlawfully leveraging its search engine by only including publishers that permit the use of their articles in AI summaries in its web search results. PMC also argued that a fifth of Google searches linked to sites also display “Overviews,” and expects that percentage to increase. The lawsuit stated Google should be required to pay publishers to summarize news articles or use them to train its AI systems without this leverage.

PMC and Google did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Chegg, an education platform that joined PMC in the lawsuit alleging Google illegally scraped its comment, also did not respond to a request for comment.

PMC will be allowed to refile its lawsuit against the tech company as it was not filed with prejudice.

The post Penske Media Lawsuit Against Google for AI Search Summaries of Articles Dismissed by Judge appeared first on TheWrap.

Just in time for California AG Rob Bonta and Paramount Chief Legal Officer Makan Delrahim, the two key figures on each side, to unpack the resolution at TheWrap’s annual business conference TheGrill.

Both Bonta and Delrahim appeared on stage (albeit in separate panels) with The Wrap CEO and Editor-in-Chief Sharon Waxman, who asked the questions everyone wanted to ask.

The sessions marked a fitting capper to a remarkable and unpredictable 12 months filled with a bidding war, competing corporate egos, several false starts and a dramatic final stand with between Bonta and Paramount. In a final turn, both Delrahim and Bonta talked up the benefits of the deal.

“When you talk about jobs, an increase from 5% to 40% is massive job increases for the United States, and that’s why IATSE, SAG-AFTRA, the Teamsters, the Laborers, and the Directors Guild of America all support the settlement,” Bonta said, while “vehemently, respectfully” disagreeing with the notion that he caved under political pressure.

“It’s a deal that is pro-competitive. It’s a deal that is transformational. That’s why we committed to it,” Delrahim said. “I’m just grateful for the time and the attention and the professional work that Attorney General Bonta and his 11 other colleagues did to work with us in good faith.”

Despite Delrahim’s claims of “good faith,” there were many bumps on the road to get to the settlement, from a canceled mediation meeting over leaks to a threat by Ellison to move Paramount out of California, risking thousands of jobs and billions in economic output.

But now comes the hard part: making good on the settlement’s requirements and building what Ellison has referred to as a “stronger Hollywood.”

Below is a recap of the key takeaways from Bonta and Delrahim.

What turned the tide in reaching the settlement?

When asked about what was the turning point that made both sides reach a settlement, Bonta told TheWrap it was Paramount deciding to negotiate in good faith.

“They weren’t addressing the concerns that we had in the case,” he said. “When they finally decided to sit down and make real commitments on the issues that we cared about when it came to the antitrust enforcement case, that’s when when we settled the case.”

Meanwhile, Delrahim argued that the key to getting a settlement done was that the 12 states had no antitrust case. He said that their argument that Paramount-WBD would have a combined market share of 27% in the theatrical film market didn’t take Amazon MGM Studios, Lionsgate or A24 into account.

“Once you factor those in, that market share goes below 20%, and that’s assuming you take their time frame from ’22 to ’25 for that market share, which is based on box office revenues,” he said. “That’s just not how antitrust works. So once the facts were out before a judge, it would have never ever held up.”

“Every step of the way when you have a bad case, you’re making precedent, and as a former enforcer, it makes it more difficult for the future. So now, every time the state AGs bring a case, guess what the parties are going to do? They’re going to file the motion we filed,” he continued. “The state AGs, I think, realized there’s not a case here. Why are we doing this? And they realized that delay is not going to help anyone, which is why all the unions and everybody supported that.”

He also credited Ellison himself with getting the deal over the finish line during the Yom Kippur holiday.

“David was incredibly involved in this process himself with the staff. He and I would fly up, come down. He was personally invested and he is the single best client a lawyer can have because he’s incredibly genuine, he’s credible, and as a former producer and a guy who understands his business, he can speak with authority when asked these questions and allegations come up about different parts of the business,” he said. “It is incredible. You don’t even have to prepare because the truth actually is incredibly powerful.”

Though Delrahim said Ellison’s threat to move was “not a bluff,” he dismissed the idea that it played any major role in settling the litigation.

Bonta defends settlement, touts it as “opposite” of Disney-Fox merger

Under the terms of the settlement, Paramount-WBD is required to invest a minimum of $1.5 billion over five years in domestic TV and film production.

It also must release at least 30 films a year in theaters for two years and 32 per year for the following three years. At least four films per year must be independent films and at least 20% must be blockbusters. If Congress passes a federal film tax credit, Paramount agreed that 20% of all film production must be in the U.S. for the first two years of the merger and 30% of the next three.

Bonta told TheWrap that the film requirement is the “opposite” of the Disney-Fox merger, noting that the two companies made about 28 films per year before the combination, which would later drop to 14 films per year.

“If the federal film tax credit passes and a California film tax credit passes, it could be a 700% increase in films being made in the United States. Only about 5%, according to Paramount’s own numbers, of their total film production is made in the United States. That could get to 40%,” he added. “So when you talk about jobs, a 700% increase from 5% to 40% is massive job increases for the United States.”

Additionally, the combined company must negotiate the distribution agreements for Paramount and Warner’s suite of cable networks separately and set up an independent editorial board to oversee CNN and CBS News’ operations.

When asked about the future of CNN, news and free speech, Bonta admitted that he’s concerned about there being too much misinformation and disinformation, but argued that the editorial board would help “ensure journalistic integrity and fact-based, non-biased, objective reporting.” Similarly, Delrahim said that while he understands the political concerns around Ellison’s ownership, he does not believe that CNN and CBS News will “foreclose access” to information.

Other settlement terms include continuing to operate Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery’s studio lots for five years, honoring collective bargaining agreements with Hollywood’s unions and making community investments, including a $5 million-per-year contribution to an independent film fund and $9.5 million annually for film and TV career training and development programs to benefit qualified educational institutions and community arts organizations.

Failure to comply with the various commitments in the settlement range from a $30 million penalty per film that misses the theatrical goal to forced divestitures of the company’s 49% Miramax stake within a 12-month period as well as BET, Comedy Central, VH1, Smithsonian, Destination America and Science Channel within a 120-day period.

“The proposed consent decree reflects a settlement between the parties
that is a fair, reasonable, and good faith approach to address the competitive harms alleged in the Complaint, and does not violate the law or public policy,” Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín wrote in her order on Wednesday.

Did Bonta cave?

Despite reaching the settlement, some are concerned that the agreement does not go far enough to address the potential harms posed by the merger.

“Allowing the Paramount Skydance-Warner Bros. Discovery merger to move forward with no meaningful structural remedies will cost jobs, mute creativity, weaken independent journalism, and damage our First Amendment rights. The ripples of this merger will be far-reaching, long-lasting, and impossible to contain,” the Block the Merger coalition said in a statement. “We are going to continue the fight.”

Bonta has also been accused of caving due to Ellison’s threat to move and pressure from California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, the Democratic nominee in California’s gubernatorial race Xavier Becerra — a claim he “vehemently and respectfully disagrees” with and said had “no influence” on the states’ decision.

“My job is to focus on the antitrust concerns and getting a resolution. So what a company may or may not do, what a governor or a next governor says or doesn’t say, has no influence,” Bonta said. “I’m the attorney general of California. I need to make a decision about the case that I brought with my 11 other attorneys general, and if we get a resolution to that case, as we did when Paramount finally came to the table in good faith, then we take it and we resolve the case.”

He added that it was ultimately a “unanimous” decision for the states to settle the case, though Connecticut AG William Tong unsuccessfully pushed for Paramount-WBD to divest CNN and CBS News during negotiations.

When asked about the political opposition surrounding the deal, Delrahim accused the Block the Merger coalition’s Norm Eisen of using the campaign against the merger as a fundraising opportunity for himself. He also doubled down on previous remarks that some who opposed the merger were antisemitic.

But when asked if there would be any retaliation against creatives who opposed the merger, Delrahim said that would be “silly.”

“We’re in the business of storytelling. We’re in the business of fulfilling consumers’ demands, and you don’t do that,” he said.

What happens now?

With the settlement now approved, the next order of business is to officially close the merger. Ellison has said the deal would close within two weeks of reaching the settlement, putting the closing date in early October.

Paramount’s Class B stock listing is expected to move from the Nasdaq to the New York Stock Exchange on Oct. 5 and begin trading on the NYSE on Oct. 6. Paramount would distribute warrants to purchase those shares on Oct. 13.

However, the merger is “subject to further closing conditions, and the ultimate timing for the closing of the WBD merger, if any, is not yet certain,” the company noted in a Friday SEC filing. As a result, Paramount may choose to cancel or postpone the move.

While the deal isn’t officially closed, Ellison has already started shaking up the combined company’s leadership team, tapping HBO CEO Casey Bloys to run Paramount+ and HBO Max, with Paramount Streaming head Cindy Holland exiting on Tuesday. Paramount has also recruited Mattel CEO Ynon Kreiz to serve as co-CEO of the combined company.

Shares of Paramount closed at $10.33 apiece, up 3.4% at the end of Wednesday’s trading session, while WBD shares finished at $30.95 per share, up 0.32%.

The post Paramount’s Makan Delrahim, California AG Rob Bonta Get Candid on Warner Bros. Merger Settlement appeared first on TheWrap.

When asked about it during TheWrap’s 2026 TheGrill conference on Wednesday, Ellison’s Chief Legal Officer Makan Delrahim told Sharon Waxman it was “not a bluff,” but pushed back on calling it a threat and dismissed the role it may have played in turning the tide on a settlement.

“I don’t know if that factored into the state AG’s views. I don’t know for one way or the other, but it wasn’t a threat. It was not a bluff,” he said. “What’s great about competition and antitrust is that the states can compete for businesses in different states. You’ve had production going to New Jersey, New York, Georgia and they compete with California.”

Instead, he argued that the key to getting a settlement done was that the 12 states had no antitrust case. Delrahim said that their argument that Paramount-WBD would have a combined market share of 27% in the theatrical film market didn’t take Amazon MGM Studios, Lionsgate or A24 into account.

“Once you factor those in, that market share goes below 20%, and that’s assuming you take their time frame from 22 to 25 for that market share, which is based on box office revenues,” he said. “That’s just not how antitrust works. So once the facts were out before a judge, it would have never ever held up.”

“Every step of the way when you have a bad case, you’re making precedent, and as a former enforcer, it makes it more difficult for the future. So now, every time the state AGs bring a case, guess what the parties are going to do? They’re going to file the motion we filed,” he continued. “The state AGs, I think, realized there’s not a case here. Why are we doing this? And they realized that delay is not going to help anyone, which is why all the unions and everybody supported that.”

He also denied Bonta’s allegations that Paramount leaked the details of the negotiations in August, adding that what was reported was not accurate. After Bonta canceled a mediation meeting, Delrahim said that the circle of Paramount leadership involved in settlement talks narrowed to him and Ellison, as well as one attorney at Latham & Watkins who was not involved in the antitrust litigation.

After negotiating back and forth, the two sides would ultimately reach an agreement on the eve of Yom Kippur on Sept. 21 and announced the terms the following day. Delrahim said it was Ellison himself who got it over the finish line during the holiday.

“David was incredibly involved in this process himself with the staff. He and I would fly up, come down. He was personally invested and he is the single best client a lawyer can have because he’s incredibly genuine, he’s credible, and as a former producer and a guy who understands his business, he can speak with authority when asked these questions and allegations come up about different parts of the business,” he said. “It is incredible. You don’t even have to prepare because the truth actually is incredibly powerful.”

The settlement includes commitments to invest a minimum of $1.5 billion over five years in domestic TV and film production, release at least 30 films a year in theaters and negotiate the distribution agreements for each company’s suite of cable networks separately.

The combined company also must set up an independent editorial board to oversee the CNN and CBS News operations, continue to operate Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery’s studio lots for five years, honor collective bargaining agreements with Hollywood’s unions and make community investments, including a $5 million-per-year contribution to an independent film fund and $9.5 million annually for film and TV career training and development programs to benefit qualified educational institutions and community arts organizations.

Failure to comply with the various commitments in the settlement range from a $30 million penalty per film that misses the theatrical goal to forced divestitures of the company’s 49% Miramax stake within a 12-month period as well as BET, Comedy Central, VH1, Smithsonian, Destination America and Science Channel within a 120-day period.

Despite concerns that the settlement is “weak and unenforceable,” Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin signed off on the agreement, calling it a “fair, reasonable, and good faith approach” to addressing the harms alleged in the AGs’ lawsuit.

In addition to unpacking how the deal got done, Delrahim addressed the politics surrounding the deal and the concerns around CNN’s independence.

“I understand people being concerned about somebody’s views that they may not like to have any access to any type of news,” he said. “But am I concerned that this issue is the cause for concern? No. Am I concerned that CNN, CBS News will somehow foreclose access to information? I don’t.”

He accused the Block the Merger coalition’s Norm Eisen of using the opposition against the merger as a fundraising campaign for himself. He also doubled down on previous remarks that some who opposed the merger were antisemitic.

When asked if there would be any retaliation against creatives who opposed the merger, Delrahim said that would be “silly.”

“We’re in the business of storytelling. We’re in the business of fulfilling consumers’ demands, and you don’t do that,” he said.

The post Paramount’s Makan Delrahim Says Threat to Move Out of California ‘Was Not a Bluff’ appeared first on TheWrap.

On Wednesday, Carr addressed questions about the promos that started running last week supporting the president. Most of the questions revolved around the White House using taxpayer money to produce the ads – running around $2.5 million for the spots according to CNN. Carr, who was appointed by Trump, didn’t see any difference between the Trump ads and regular PSAs.

“I don’t think there’s anything unique or different about it, other than being a normal PSA: the types of PSAs that the government naturally and normally runs,” Carr said.

He added: “What I have seen is that these are normal force PSAs that the government runs – Republicans and Democrats routinely – and there doesn’t strike me as anything at all out of the ordinary. And there’s nothing in there that strikes me that merit any sort of FCC review or any liability on any broadcaster for running a regular, normal PSA ad.”

The appearance of the ads prompted watchdog group Public Citizen to file a lawsuit that claimed the Trump administration violated “the federal law against using taxpayer funds to finance propaganda.” The complaint pushed to have the ads removed from the air by broadcasters.

“That the Trump administration not only failed to acknowledge and investigate last week’s illegal ad, but instead doubled down and released a second piece of taxpayer-funded political propaganda during the mass-viewing moment of Sunday football is appalling and alarming,” Lisa Gilbert, co-president of Public Citizen, said in a statement. “These illegal ads should immediately be pulled from the air, and the White House’s many apparent violations of the law should be investigated.”

The White House explained that the Obama administration made ads to promote the Affordable Care Act as a precedent. Carr also handwaved the Public Citizen lawsuit and statement.

“Activist groups like Public Citizen, there’s groups on the left that have long worked and pushed to weaponize the FCC’s license renewal process,” Carr said. “I’m sure that they will do it again in the future.”

The ads first aired on Fox News last week and amid a number of NFL and college football games. They range from making claims that “America will never be a communist country” to UFC’s Dana White praising Trump as the “toughest, most resilient person that I’ve ever met.”

The post FCC Chairman Dismisses Concerns About Trump Ads Funded By Taxpayers: ‘A Normal PSA’ appeared first on TheWrap.

“The proposed consent decree reflects a settlement between the parties
that is a fair, reasonable, and good faith approach to address the competitive harms alleged in the Complaint, and does not violate the law or public policy,” Martínez-Olguín wrote in her order on Wednesday.

“In years to come, we’ll be able to point to this failure to put consumers over the monied interests of corporate consolidation as the tipping-point moment for media in this country,” the Block the Merger coalition said in a statement opposing the decision. “Allowing the Paramount Skydance-Warner Bros. Discovery merger to move forward with no meaningful structural remedies will cost jobs, mute creativity, weaken independent journalism and damage our First Amendment rights. The ripples of this merger will be far-reaching, long-lasting, and impossible to contain.

“If there is one discernible benefit to the approval of this corporate takeover, it’s that people are now wide awake and paying attention – and their anger is not going to fade away. We are going to build on this movement to stand united as creatives, policy experts, and public advocates to achieve enduring media policy change that funds and diversifies our media and safeguards its independence. We are going to ensure the government protects the interests of everyday people and prevents them from continuing to be bulldozed for those of oligarch billionaires. We are going to continue the fight.”

Under the terms of the settlement, Paramount has agreed to a minimum investment of $300 million per year for five years in U.S. film and TV production, amounting to a total of $1.5 billion. The company will also release at least 30 films per year theatrically in the first two years of the deal and 32 films per year in the three years after that.

At least four films per year must be independent films and at least 20% must be blockbusters, although the consent decree defines independent films as movies “based on an original screenplay” or simply co-produced by Paramount. If Congress passes a federal film tax credit, Paramount agreed that 20% of all film production must be in the U.S. for the first two years of the merger and 30% of the next three.

Paramount will also be held to its prior commitment to have a theatrical window of 45 days and hold its films back from streaming availability for 90 days. 

On the TV side, Paramount agreed to negotiate distribution for its suite of cable networks and Warner Bros. cable portfolio separately, unless a distributor requests otherwise in writing. It also agreed to establish an independent oversight board at CNN and CBS News and will continue to operate free, ad-supported streaming platform Pluto TV.

Additionally, the companies will maintain their respective studio lots, honor collective bargaining agreements with Hollywood’s unions and make community investments. Those investments include a $5 million-per-year contribution to an independent films fund and $9.5 million annually for film and TV career training and development programs to benefit qualified educational institutions and community arts organizations.

Failure to comply with the various commitments in the settlement range from a $30 million penalty per film that misses the theatrical goal to forced divestitures of the company’s 49% Miramax stake within a 12-month period as well as BET, Comedy Central, VH1, Smithsonian, Destination America and Science Channel within a 120-day period.

The official approval comes after the Block the Merger coalition called the agreement “weak and unenforceable.” Sen. Corey Booker had also asked the court to subject the proposed consent decree to an “independent public-interest review” before entering it.

Martínez-Olguín had asked Paramount and the state AGs to address her outstanding questions and Booker’s concerns prior to signing off on the consent decree. On Monday, the parties said it was a “reasonable compromise” that was negotiated at “arm’s length” with enforcement provisions that “have teeth.”

During TheWrap’s 2026 TheGrill conference, Rob Bonta also pushed back against claims that he caved and that he was pressured to settle due to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, the Democratic nominee in California’s gubernatorial race Xavier Becerra or Ellison’s threat to move Paramount out of the state.

“My job is to focus on the antitrust concerns and getting a resolution. So what a company may or may not do, what a governor or a next governor says or doesn’t say, has no influence,” Bonta continued. “I’m the attorney general of California. I need to make a decision about the case that I brought with my 11 other attorneys general, and if we get a resolution to that case, as we did when Paramount finally came to the table in good faith, then we take it and we resolve the case.”

Paramount CEO David Ellison previously said the merger would close two weeks after reaching the settlement, or in early October. Paramount’s Class B stock listing is expected to move from the Nasdaq to the New York Stock Exchange on Oct. 5 and begin trading on the NYSE on Oct. 6. It would distribute warrants to purchase those shares on Oct. 13.

While the deal isn’t officially closed, Ellison has already started shaking up the combined company’s leadership team, tapping HBO CEO Casey Bloys to run Paramount+ and HBO Max, with Paramount Streaming head Cindy Holland exiting on Tuesday. The company has also recruited Mattel CEO Ynon Kreiz for an undisclosed senior role in the company.

The post Judge Approves Paramount-Warner Bros. Merger Settlement appeared first on TheWrap.

“I appreciate and understand the diversity of perspectives on this proposed settlement. I will certainly vehemently, respectfully, disagree with with those positions,” Bonta told Sharon Waxman during TheWrap’s 2026 TheGrill conference on Wednesday. “We set out to solve an antitrust problem that we saw in two markets that were impacted by this proposed merger in the distribution of wide-release films market, including blockbuster films, and the basic cable channel licensing market. For a long time there was no proposed solution and then Paramount came to the table in good faith to act sincerely to settle the antitrust case.”

He also pushed back on claims that California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, the Democratic nominee in California’s gubernatorial race Xavier Becerra or Paramount CEO David Ellison’s threat to move the Hollywood studio out of the state pressured him into settling. The latter could’ve resulted in up to $21.2 billion loss in annual economic output, per Los Angeles’ Economic Development Corporation.

“My job is to focus on the antitrust concerns and getting a resolution. So what a company may or may not do, what a governor or a next governor says or doesn’t say, has no influence,” Bonta continued. “I’m the attorney general of California. I need to make a decision about the case that I brought with my 11 other attorneys general, and if we get a resolution to that case, as we did when Paramount finally came to the table in good faith, then we take it and we resolve the case.”

He added that it was ultimately a “unanimous” decision for the states to settle the case, though Connecticut AG William Tong unsuccessfully pushed for Paramount-WBD to divest CNN and CBS News during negotiations.

Under the terms of the settlement, Paramount-WBD must release at least 30 films a year in theaters for two years and 32 per year for the following three years. At least four films per year must be independent films and at least 20% must be blockbusters. If Congress passes a federal film tax credit, Paramount agreed that 20% of all film production must be in the U.S. for the first two years of the merger and 30% of the next three.

Bonta further stated this requirement is the “opposite” of the Disney-Fox merger, noting that the two companies made about 28 films per year before the combination, which would later drop to 14 films per year.

The combined company is also required to invest a minimum of $1.5 billion over five years in domestic TV and film production and negotiate the distribution agreements for each company’s suite of cable networks separately. Additionally, it must set up an independent editorial board to oversee the CNN and CBS News operations, which Bonta said would help “ensure journalistic integrity and fact-based, non-biased, objective reporting.”

“I’m an American. I care about our information ecosystem. I think it’s broken. I think there’s too much misinformation. There’s too much disinformation,” he said when asked about the future of CNN, news and free speech. “I think we can only move forward as a society, as a country, if we share the same facts, so that we can base our solutions on those facts. But we don’t share the same facts, so of course I’m concerned about it, which is the reason that among the AGs we had a rightful concern in the settlement process, which is more flexible and more provides more opportunity for creativity.”

Other settlement terms include continuing to operate Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery’s studio lots for five years, honoring collective bargaining agreements with Hollywood’s unions and making community investments, including a $5 million-per-year contribution to an independent film fund and $9.5 million annually for film and TV career training and development programs to benefit qualified educational institutions and community arts organizations.

Failure to comply with the various commitments in the settlement range from a $30 million penalty per film that misses the theatrical goal to forced divestitures of the company’s 49% Miramax stake within a 12-month period as well as BET, Comedy Central, VH1, Smithsonian, Destination America and Science Channel within a 120-day period.

Despite Bonta’s comments, the settlement has raised concerns among the Block the Merger coalition, which believes it is “weak and unenforceable.” Sen. Corey Booker also asked the court to subject the consent decree to an “independent public-interest review” before entering it.

But Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin approved the agreement on Wednesday, calling it a “fair, reasonable, and good faith approach” to addressing the harms alleged in the AGs’ lawsuit. Ellison has said that the deal would close within two weeks of reaching the settlement, or early October.

Paramount’s Class B stock listing is expected to move from the Nasdaq to the New York Stock Exchange on Oct. 5 and begin trading on the NYSE on Oct. 6. Paramount would distribute warrants to purchase those shares on Oct. 13.

However, the merger is “subject to further closing conditions, and the ultimate timing for the closing of the WBD merger, if any, is not yet certain,” the company noted in a Friday SEC filing. As a result, Paramount may choose to cancel or postpone the move.

In addition to the Paramount-WBD settlement, Bonta addressed an up to $17 billion settlement with Meta, which requires the tech giant to introduce rules for teenage users, including a default daily time limits, blocks on nighttime use that can only be lifted by a parent, enhanced parental supervision tools, age assurance measures to detect users under the age of 18 and children under the age of 13 and the appointment of an independent auditor who will oversee compliance.

The proposed settlement will pay the states involved in this case over the course of 10 years, and California alone is expected to receive between $1.5 billion and $2.1 billion. In agreeing to settle, Meta denied wrongdoing.

“Meta knew that its designs and its features created mental health harm to the kids. They knew about it and they doubled down on them instead of stopping it,” Bonta said on Wednesday. “They knew they were hurting kids and they kept doing it. That was wrong. That had to be stopped. AGs across the country worked together to stop it, and we got important commitments.”

He called the settlement a “good blueprint for what other states should do,” but urged others in the industry to come on board.

“YouTube needs to comply with the same requirements that Meta is. TikTok needs to comply with the same requirements as as Meta,” Bonta said. “We’re speaking through a lawsuit to TikTok. Yes. And we expect YouTube and Snap to come into compliance as well. So we are actively engaged in helping manifest that outcome across the industry.”

“I think the federal government can play an important role in providing a floor of protection, and then other states can raise raise the floor and have a higher ceiling of protection, as California often does,” he continued. “But [the mental well-being and safety of our kids] is a shared responsibility, a shared problem.”

Bonta is also investigating OpenAI over a hack that its AI programs carried out on their own against another artificial intelligence company, Hugging Face.

“We should all be alarmed. We should all be vigilant in what we demand happen next. There needs to be guardrails. There needs to be enforceable safety protocols that keep us safe,” Bonta said. “No one should be thinking that you know this existential threat of AI is inevitable. It is not. It’s based on what we do next. And so, as the California AG, I have one of the most important enforcement roles in making sure that our homegrown companies, Anthropic, OpenAI, are complying with existing law, are making sure that their product is safe.”

He emphasized that his office is looking “very closely” at what OpenAI and Anthropic are doing, calling it a “top priority.” While he declined to comment on the pending investigation, he isn’t ruling out legal action and said he’d be “fair, firm and aggressive in making sure that we’re safe from AI.” 

“There will be no lack of clarity if and when we act. But we we care deeply about the risks to safety,” he said. “We’re looking at Hugging Face now, so we could act at any time. We would already announce that and we’re broadly concerned about AI’s risks and violations of law generally. I would also say other states are focused on this too, and they should be. This is all hands on deck, in my humble opinion. The more watchdogs, the better. The more regulators, the better.”

His comments come as he is running for re-election as California’s AG.

“I’m focused on being attorney general of this great state. I love it here. My parents brought me here from the Philippines when we fled a dictator and wanted democracy and freedom for me. This gave me a great life, a public school education, a place to raise my kids and build my career. I want to give everything I can to California,” he said. “If my bosses, the people of California, you decide to vote me back in, it will be the honor and privilege of a lifetime to keep fighting for you and for the future of this great state, and whatever comes next, we’ll just have to see. But I love serving, as long as the people want me to serve in public office to represent them and fight for them. It would be my great honor.” 

The post Rob Bonta ‘Vehemently and Respectfully Disagrees’ That He ‘Caved’ on Warner Bros.-Paramount Suit appeared first on TheWrap.

On Tuesday, Flynn was found guilty of all charges – including a count of murder and counts of tampering with evidence – by a jury. The guilty verdict comes seven months after the ex-“American Idol” contestant was arrested in connection to his wife Ashley’s murder.

“While the defendant told law enforcement that he was sleeping, his electronic devices documented something different. They documented movement and activity in the hours leading up to Ashley’s murder,” Matthew C. Joseph, assistant prosecuting attorney for the Miami County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office said in his closing argument. “The defendant said he was sleeping. His devices say he was awake and moving.”

Elsewhere in his closing address, Joseph touched on Flynn’s motive, noting, “Being the victim allowed him to do that without being the husband who left his wife for a mistress. Instead, he’d be the husband whose wife was tragically murdered by an unknown intruder.”

The former music pastor, who competed on Season 12 in 2013, was arrested and charged back in February. He faced one count of murder, two counts of felonious assault and two counts of tampering with evidence. His wife Ashley was found shot to death on Feb. 16 at 2:30 a.m. after reports of a burglary at the couple’s home in Ohio.

“I just want to take care of my daughters. I’m not a risk,” he told Judge Samuel Huffman back when he was arrested.

During his stint on “American Idol,” Flynn shared his devotion for his wife. “I absolutely love the Lord. I love my wife more than anything,” he said in a hometown interview at the time. “She is very, very pretty. I love her.”

The post Former ‘American Idol’ Contestant Caleb Flynn Found Guilty of Wife’s Murder appeared first on TheWrap.

“Anyone who receives a text message or other communication related to Nancy Guthrie is encouraged to report it to law enforcement. We also urge the public to remain vigilant, as scammers may attempt to take advantage of this situation. Do not send money or provide information in response to unsolicited messages,” the task force shared on X. “Investigators will continue to review reported messages for credibility and investigate any potential attempts at extortion.”

ORIGINAL: The Pima County Sheriff’s Department addressed reports of a new ransom note in the Nancy Guthrie case Monday, sharing that they were “working to determine credibility” of the alleged missive.

“The PCSD/FBI Guthrie task force was recently made aware of a new possible ransom note in the Nancy Guthrie investigation,” a spokesperson for the sheriff’s office told TheWrap on Monday. “Investigators are also aware of social media comments being made regarding this note and are looking further into this and working to determine credibility.”

The investigators’ statement came hours after true-crime YouTuber Jonathan Lee Riche, known as JLR Investigates online, took to X and claimed that a “friend of Nancy Guthrie contacted authorities after receiving a bitcoin demand.”

Riche followed up later on Monday, writing on X while livestreaming on the app, “We are speaking with Lauren now. Friend of Nancy Guthrie. Who got a extortion bitcoin demand claiming Nancy is alive in Mexico. FBI are involved.”

We should note that while Riche describes himself as an “investigative reporter” on his social media platforms, he is not credentialed with any professional outlet.

The mother of “Today” anchor Savannah Guthrie was last seen on the evening of Jan. 31, when family dropped her off at her Tucson, Ariz. home. However, by late-midday on Feb. 1, the elder Guthrie was reported missing after she didn’t show up at a friend’s place to watch a virtual church service. Pima County investigators later shared that they believed Guthrie was taken against her will.

Guthrie’s security camera, which had been disabled, later revealed images of a man in a ski mask, jacket, gloves and a backpack outside her property. FBI Phoenix later described the suspect “as a male, approximately 5’9” – 5’10” tall, with an average build.”

Savannah, along with her siblings, have made several public pleas for their mother’s return. In July, Savannah made another impassioned statement to her mother’s kidnapper on Instagram.

“I come today with a very specific message,” Savannah said at the time. “It has been months since our mom was taken from us. Our family is in agony. We are in a nightmare that will not end. Nothing about our situation has changed. We have done our part. We will never stop looking for her. We will always ache for her, feel that hole in our hearts.”

“The world can be a cruel and unforgiving place and I know you have tried to do things the right way. So I’m asking you, begging you, to do the right thing now. Make the right choice. Help us find her. Tell us where to look for her,” she continued. “I truly believe it is never too late to do the right thing. Help us bring this situation to an end. For all of us, no matter where we’ve been, what we’ve done, I believe there is always a way home. Please make the right choice.”

No one has been arrested or named a suspect in connection with Guthrie’s disappearance, despite multiple searches, analyzed DNA, alleged ransom notes and other investigative processes. However, one of the aforementioned ransom notes claimed that the Guthrie matriarch “perished shortly after she was taken” and was “buried in nature now.”

The effort continues to locate her presumed remains.

The post Nancy Guthrie Kidnapping Investigators Determine New Ransom Note Is Not Credible appeared first on TheWrap.

The news organizations filed the 49-page memorandum late Monday, in which they asked the D.C. federal court to issue a preliminary injunction blocking Trump and his administration from enforcing a ban on their White House access and credentials.

“On September 24, this Court entered an order temporarily prohibiting enforcement of the President’s ban, correctly holding that the administration’s post hoc letters were too little, too late, to satisfy the Due Process Clause under binding Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit precedent,” the filing stated. “Despite this Court’s clear direction that the hard passes of CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO reporters be ‘immediately return[ed], reinstat[ed], and restore[d]’ … the administration continued to confiscate passes and deny access to journalists who came to work at the White House on September 24, before finally coming into compliance roughly 11 hours after this Court’s order.”

The document continued: “And the White House has persisted in unpredictably and inconsistently implementing its ban, including by barring CNN from fulfilling its role as designated television network pooler on September 26—to the detriment of CNN, its fellow pool members and, ultimately, the American public. The White House’s words and actions leave little doubt that it will immediately reinstitute a complete ban of CNN, MS NOW, and POLITICO if allowed the opportunity. Because the ban is an unlawful assault on the most fundamental First Amendment freedoms and will inflict irreparable harm on Plaintiffs and the public if not restrained, this Court should preliminarily enjoin its enforcement pending the resolution of this case.”

Elsewhere in the filing, the outlets argued that “President Trump has continued to justify the ban on the ground that he dislikes Plaintiffs’ coverage of him and his administration without even mentioning national security.”

The filing highlighted Attorney General Todd Blanche’s Sunday press appearance, in which he defended Trump’s press ban as a fight against the national security risk of “one-sided news.”

“The real reason Defendants imposed the ban – expressed contemporaneously and repeatedly since then – is that the President dislikes Plaintiffs’ supposedly ‘negative’ reporting,” the filing stated.

A representative for the White House told TheWrap in a statement, “President Trump is the most accessible President in history — holding open press events, regular gaggles and interviews, taking questions nearly every day, and speaking directly to the American people through social media. But if a reporter walks into an interview with their headline and narrative already decided, why do they need to be in the room? They can write their garbage from anywhere. Even after outlets were given access to the White House, they declined to cover various events proving this isn’t about access. It’s performative and dishonest.”

The drama all started on Sept. 18, when Trump took to Truth Social and shared that he was banning the three outlets from the White House for “constantly” writing negatively about his administration.

“Media Outlets shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they’re covering the President of the United States, the Trump Administration, or the United States of America,” Trump wrote at the time. “Other Fake News Media Outlets to follow.”

He doubled down on his sentiment while speaking to reporters that same day, noting, “I don’t think a court should allow fake news to be written day after day after day. I think that somebody has a right to keep them away if they’re going to write false stories all the time.”

Trump added: “There’s something wrong with a country that can allow people to purposely tell negative stories … if they want to write them, that’s fine, but I don’t have to let them into my, into the people’s house.”

Then, on Sept. 21, CNN, Politico and MS NOW sued Trump and his administration after their reporters were stripped of their White House access and credentials.

“This morning, we notified the government that we are filing a lawsuit today to protect our First Amendment rights and defend the principle that the government does not decide what the press reports or publishes,” the outlets shared in a joint statement. “Without notice or process, the White House revoked our journalists’ credentials because it objected to our reporting. Left unchallenged, this threatens press freedom and the public’s right to independent journalism free from government interference.”

Not only did the outlets file a complaint and a memorandum of law in D.C. District Court, they also filed a motion for a temporary restraining order.

However, the president stood firm in his decision in the wake of the suit, once again bemoaning in a follow-up Truth Social post that the outlets only write “negatively” about him.

“It is called the Oval Office, and it should be treated with Decorum, Respect, and Dignity, not defiled by Third Rate Clowns, who purposefully distort, twist, and degrade with everything they write or publish,” he wrote. “Virtually every story about me, or anything having to do with me, is negative, wrong and, in many cases, DANGEROUS for our Country! No matter how GREAT my Achievements, they trivialize and demean. The fact is, I won all seven Swing States, the Popular Vote, the Electoral College (312 to 226), and the Counties throughout America by 86%, and yet it is reported that I get 94% bad publicity. With such a Crooked and Corrupt Press, how did I win in such a LANDSLIDE? It is because the Media has NO credibility, and that is a very bad thing for our Nation! Why should I have to give ‘access’ to such people? Perhaps Judge Kelly could explain that! In any event, I have an obligation to fight for the Success and Safety of our Country. FAKE NEWS IS A THREAT TO DEMOCRACY, and I will do whatever is necessary to make sure that the U.S.A. thrives.”

In the early morning hours Thursday, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly ordered the White House to reinstate credentials for reporters at CNN, MS NOW and Politico. However, it wasn’t until noon that day that reporters were able to regain access. Additionally, Judge Kelly declined the administration’s request to delay the order from taking effect.

The post CNN, MS NOW and Politico Seek to Extend White House Access Order, Warn Trump Will ‘Reinstitute a Complete Ban’ Without It appeared first on TheWrap.

According to Bay Area police, McKinsey was shot Saturday afternoon just after 3 p.m. in Dublin, Calif. McKinsey, who served as the head of engineering and games player experiences for the Times, was found by a Dublin police officer on the ground outside of the Dublin Sports Grounds after a number of witnesses called in a shooting.

McKinsey had multiple gunshot wounds and was pronounced dead at the scene, authorities shared on Monday.

Shouyong Zhang, 76, and Shili Chen, 76, were later identified as two suspects in the killing. The married couple were later identified as McKinsey’s in-laws.

The pair are currently being held at the Santa Rita Jail amid pending charges.

The shooting followed a tense legal dispute between McKinsey and his wife, Candice Jang, who were battling over custody at the time of his death. Per legal documents obtained by NBC News, Jang had been granted a temporary restraining order against McKinsey, who had filed for divorce in December. McKinsey had also pleaded not guilty in 2025 to two charges of misdemeanor child abuse.

However, per the New York Times, McKinsey filed his own restraining against Jang, alleging abuse against his wife and her parents. McKinsey, who was a transgender man, alleged in one court filing that his mother-in-law called him, as well as one of his sons, a “pervert” and a “monster” after the boy was allowed to wear a dress. He also claimed his father-in-law punched him in the chest while he recovered from double mastectomy surgery in 2010.

The estranged couple were set to face off in a hearing in October.

McKinsey, who was 40 at the time of his death, worked at the Times since 2023. He received a bachelor’s degree from Georgia Tech before completing his master’s at the University of California, Berkeley.

The post Trans New York Times Executive Allegedly Shot Dead by In-Laws Amid Bitter Family Dispute appeared first on TheWrap.