Western Auctioneer with Two Fingers up and Gavel in Hand

Getty Images

As investors pick sides in Netflix vs. Paramount, analysts say a renewed Warner Bros. bidding war looks inevitable

Analysts at Bloomberg on Wednesday said Paramount’s WBD hostile takeover offer could go as high as $35 per share.

Which company will eventually win the rights to “Entourage” remains up in the air on Wednesday, as the bidding war for Warner Bros. Discovery reignites amid takeover attempts by both Netflix and Paramount Skydance.

The race had seemed to be over last week, when Netflix and WBD agreed to an $83 billion deal for the latter’s streaming and film studio assets. Then on Monday, a frustrated Paramount took its offering directly to Warner Bros. shareholders in a $30-per-share hostile takeover bid.

Though Netflix’s deal faces a wall of opposition — including apparent skepticism from the Trump administration — Paramount’s offering may not come at enough of a per-share premium for investors to bite (though some have already expressed interest). As such, both companies have communicated that they have the ability to boost their offers for Warner Bros., per Bloomberg reporting.

Meanwhile, Bloomberg Intelligence analysts wrote Wednesday that another bidding war between Paramount and Netflix “looks inevitable.” Paramount could “justify going as high as $35” per share, the analysts wrote.

That extra $5 per share could make a big difference, according to reporting from the New York Post’s Charlie Gasparino, who wrote that WBD CEO David Zaslav has told people involved in the deal that a $35-per-share offer could “upend” Netflix’s deal.

Should Warner ultimately decide to back out of its deal with Netflix and embrace Paramount’s offer, it (or, effectively, Paramount) would owe Netflix $2.8 billion. Netflix’s side of the breakup fee is even steeper at $5.8 billion.

The Netflix-Warner Bros. deal now faces a wall of opposition

Netflix will owe Warner Bros. $5.8 billion in cash if the deal is terminated on antitrust grounds.

Max Knoblauch12/5/25

Jon Keegan12/5/25

The New York Times, Chicago Tribune sue Perplexity

The New York Times is suing the AI search engine startup Perplexity, alleging repeated copyright violations.

In the complaint, the Times accuses Perplexity of scraping the company’s content and generating outputs that are “identical or substantially similar” to Times content:

“Upon information and belief, Perplexity has unlawfully copied, distributed, and displayed millions of copyrighted Times stories, videos, podcasts, images and other works to power its products and tools.”

The Times also alleges that Perplexity’s AI tool generates “hallucinations” and falsely attribute them to the Times, creating confusion that harms the company’s brand.

In a separate suit filed Thursday, the Chicago Tribune accused Perplexity of similar copyright violations.

Perplexity’s “answer engine” made early inroads in an attempt to replace traditional web searches with AI-powered responses, but its larger competitors such as OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic have been adding similar features. OpenAI recently released its own AI-powered web browser, ChatGPT Atlas, which challenges Perplexity’s Comet browser.

Jesse Dwyer, Head of Communication for Perplexity told Sherwood News in a statement:

“Publishers have been suing new tech companies for a hundred years, starting with radio, TV, the internet, social media and now AI. Fortunately it’s never worked, or we’d all be talking about this by telegraph.”

New York Times Sues A.I. Start-Up Perplexity Over Use of Copyrighted Work

“Upon information and belief, Perplexity has unlawfully copied, distributed, and displayed millions of copyrighted Times stories, videos, podcasts, images and other works to power its products and tools.”

The Times also alleges that Perplexity’s AI tool generates “hallucinations” and falsely attribute them to the Times, creating confusion that harms the company’s brand.

In a separate suit filed Thursday, the Chicago Tribune accused Perplexity of similar copyright violations.

Jesse Dwyer, Head of Communication for Perplexity told Sherwood News in a statement:

“Publishers have been suing new tech companies for a hundred years, starting with radio, TV, the internet, social media and now AI. Fortunately it’s never worked, or we’d all be talking about this by telegraph.”

Jon Keegan11/28/25

European regulators will examine if Apple’s maps and ads businesses require stricter oversight

Apple has notified European regulators that its Apple Maps and Apple Ads platforms meet the threshold to be called “gatekeepers” under the European Commission’s Digital Markets Act, the European Commission said.

European antitrust regulators will now examine if the tech giant’s Maps and Ads units should be subject to stricter regulation. According to the DMA, when a platform reaches 45 million monthly active users and a market cap of €75 billion ($79 billion), it triggers the “gatekeeper” designation and additional rules apply.

While Apple notified regulators that the threshold has been met, it is pushing back on the designation, saying in a rebuttal to rule makers that the platforms are actually relatively small compared to the competition in Europe and should be excluded. The EC has 45 working days to make a final determination about the designation, and Apple would have six months to comply, Reuters reported.

EU to examine if Apple Ads and Maps subject to tough rules, Apple says no

Jon Keegan11/26/25

Delhi High Court says Apple could face $38 billion penalty in Indian antitrust case

India’s Delhi High Court says that Apple could face a penalty as high as $38 billion for what its investigators describe as “abusive conduct” related to the tech giant’s app store, Reuters reports.

Apple is challenging the constitutionality of the country’s new antitrust law, taking specific issue with the fact that penalties are calculated based on companies’ total annual global revenue, rather than just revenue derived from India.

That global figure could mean fines as high as $38 billion, according to a court filing seen by Reuters.

The Competition Commission of India has not issued a final ruling in the case.

Apple contests India's antitrust penalty law with risk of $38 billion fine, filing shows

That global figure could mean fines as high as $38 billion, according to a court filing seen by Reuters.

The Competition Commission of India has not issued a final ruling in the case.

Jon Keegan11/26/25

Anthropic CEO Amodei asked to testify before Congress about Claude-powered Chinese cyberattack, Axios reports

Earlier this month, Anthropic revealed that Chinese state actors had used its Claude chatbot to orchestrate and execute a cyber espionage campaign for the first time. The company said that after it detected its product was being used in that manner, it was able to respond and disrupt malicious behavior.

Now, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has been called to testify before the House Committee on Homeland Security, along with Google Cloud CEO Thomas Kuria and Quantum Xchange CEO Eddy Zervigon, Axios reports.

The House committee is seeking information about how nation-state actors are using AI agents to devise and execute novel cyberattacks, like the one that Anthropic disrupted.

Exclusive: Anthropic CEO called to testify before Congress about Chinese AI cyberattack