Business
Trump, the Deal Maker in Chief, Is Back
The questions facing a new Trump era
Good morning on this Inauguration Day. Welcome to Round 2 of President Donald Trump. No matter your politics, it is likely to be a historic ride.
For business and policy leaders, the next administration is expected to be filled with deals of all sorts — from White House agreements brokered over secure phone lines with foreign powers to congressional backroom pacts to headline-making deals negotiated by Wall Street.
This is a transactional president, perhaps the most transactional ever. He wants to engage with the business community, which is a big distinction from the Biden administration. He takes great pride in publicly name-dropping the C.E.O.s he’s talking with. “Today, I spoke with Tim Cook of Apple,” he told supporters last night. “He said they’re going to make a massive investment in the United States because of our big election win.”
Trump is rooting for big business, until he isn’t. He’s fickle. And uncertain.
That poses a big challenge for business leaders: How and when might Trump’s unpredictability emerge? Is there a red line? C.E.O. calculations have been that a second term means that uncertainty — something many dislike — is a certainty. But many think that they can manage it, or at least they tell themselves they can.
After Trump’s 2016 win, he invited tech C.E.O.s to meet with him (that was, of course, a photo op). They showed up, though many came reluctantly. Others joined his administration’s various councils only to depart when he said things that appeared to cross a line.
This time, many are all-in — at least for now. Some genuinely support him, or at least think he was better than the alternative. Others have taken an “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” attitude. Or it may be that his threats, real and imagined, are working. He said as much in a candid moment about his threats to arrest Mark Zuckerberg, Meta’s C.E.O., and the company’s decision to abandon fact-checking on the platform, saying Zuckerberg’s decision was “probably” the result of those threats. (Many of these same people rebuked him after the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol in 2021).
We will see how long the love affair with business lasts. It may be longer than some skeptics suggest. Now that he’s in power, the business community needs Trump to like them: It’ll need his support if deals and investments are to flourish; it needs him to push the corporate tax rate lower; and the crypto world needs him. (He also needs it given his and his family’s forays into the sector). All of this raises all sorts of questions, as we get into below.
We’ll be here, every morning, reporting on all of it, as well as raising and asking tough questions. I imagine there will be a lot of them. — Andrew Ross Sorkin
TikTok’s fuzzy future
TikTok users in the United States breathed sighs of relief on Sunday after the video platform began to resume service, thanks to Donald Trump’s pledge to suspend a ban of the app.
But while the president-elect took credit for saving the hugely popular app — “So I like TikTok! I had a slightly good experience, wouldn’t you say?” he said at a rally on Sunday — his thinly sketched proposal leaves some big questions unanswered.
What Trump said: His “initial thought,” he wrote on Truth Social, was a 50-50 joint venture between ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese owner, and an unspecified American entity. It represented Trump’s favorite thing — a deal — and on the surface had some appeal.
Trump added that he envisioned ByteDance handing over half of the company to the U.S. and that the U.S. wouldn’t pay a dime. “Whether you like TikTok or not, we’re going to make a lot of money,” he said.
But hold on a second. Trump hasn’t addressed the thorny national security concerns that persuaded a bipartisan group of lawmakers and President Biden to back the TikTok ban, not to mention who controls the ByteDance algorithm that is the key to the app’s success.
Moreover, it’s not clear how Trump can legally get around the ban. While he has promised to issue an executive order saving the app, the law is still on the books — though Trump can choose how aggressively to enforce parts of it, legal experts say.
Republicans and their allies criticized Trump’s efforts to circumvent the law:
-
Senator Tom Cotton, the Arkansas senator who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, warned on X that any company that aids “communist-controlled TikTok could face hundreds of billions of dollars of ruinous liability under the law.”
-
Speaker Mike Johnson added that he expected the law to be enforced: “The law is very precise, and the only way to extend that is if there is an actual deal in the works,” he said on “Meet the Press” on Sunday.
-
Joe Lonsdale, the venture capitalist who’s close to Trump allies like Peter Thiel, wrote on X, “Tomorrow he becomes POTUS, NOT King. Congress and SCOTUS were clear. He can give TikTok 90 days, then if it’s not sold, any company facilitating it is breaking the law.”
-
And Elon Musk reiterated that while he didn’t believe in banning TikTok, he found it “unbalanced” that TikTok be allowed to operate in the U.S. but X remains blocked in China. (That said, China’s vice president, Han Zheng, met with Musk and other business leaders to say his country was open to American business.)
What next? Trump will need to flesh out his proposal in the coming days to persuade lawmakers and others that it’s legally sound. Meanwhile, other bidders for TikTok are circling, including the billionaire Frank McCourt, who has assembled a group that wants to buy the app without its key algorithm, and reportedly Perplexity, an artificial intelligence start-up.
For ByteDance’s U.S. investors, which include General Atlantic, Susquehanna and Sequoia, a preferred course — second only to keeping the whole thing intact — may well be to spin the company to themselves. But if China won’t let them keep the algorithm, what would they be left with?
Executive orders galore
In between the dining, dancing and speechifying, President-elect Donald Trump is expected to unveil a flurry of executive orders on Monday.
First up, according to Stephen Miller, Trump’s deputy chief of staff, are major policy shake-ups for energy, immigration and border security, work protections for federal employees, as well as halting or scaling back key planks of the Biden administration’s climate agenda.
D.E.I. is also in the cross hairs. President Biden’s diversity, equity and inclusion measures for federal agencies are expected to be rolled back, just as big companies, such as Meta and Amazon, plan to eliminate or revamp some of these policies.
Electric vehicle credits are on the chopping block. Trump has long promised to undo the Inflation Reduction Act, a law that has supporters among some oil executives. It also extends credits to electric vehicle customers. Withdrawing those could dent sales of E.V.s.
That said, Elon Musk, Tesla’s C.E.O. and a key Trump ally, has suggested his company could weather a pullback.
Crypto bulls rejoice
Stock and bond markets are closed in the United States for Martin Luther King’s Birthday. But crypto trading is available — and it has helped mint Donald Trump as the latest crypto billionaire.
This weekend saw a frenzied rally for Donald Trump and Melania Trump meme coins, prompted by Trump himself. “GET YOUR $TRUMP NOW,” the president-elect told his followers on Truth Social this weekend.
It rallied further when Robinhood, the trading platform that made a big donation to Trump’s inauguration fund, began letting its customers trade the $TRUMP coin.
Bitcoin, which hit a record on Monday, and other digital tokens have soared since Election Day on the hope that the incoming administration will loosen regulation around the sector. That said, the rally in $Trump and $Melania tokens has astounded longtime market watchers.
Ethics watchdogs see the coin as a “profound conflict of interest” for Trump. Though organizers of the Trump coin say that buying it is neither a political donation nor an investment contract, skeptics say it raises questions about the president-elect benefiting from an industry he is supposed to be regulating.
There’s also the question of whether foreign governments could buy into the coin, potentially violating the foreign emoluments clause of the Constitution.
“This may represent the single worst conflict of interest in the modern history of the presidency,” Norm Eisen, a White House ethics adviser during the Obama administration, told The Washington Post.
The big money behind the inauguration
As Donald Trump prepares to take office, one thing is becoming especially clear: Washington is increasingly becoming a city where it pays to pay up.
The inaugural committee has already raised more than $170 million, shattering a record set by the first Trump committee.
Corporations as well as donors have opened their wallets. Apple, Google, Meta and Microsoft all gave millions to Trump this time, taking advantage of the more-permissive rules around donations for post-election activities such as the inauguration.
“Corporate America has embraced President Trump,” Brian Ballard, a powerful lobbyist and Trump fund-raiser, told The Washington Post. “Every corporate client I have wants to be a part of it.”
Critics of such donations point to a pay-to-play culture. An analysis by OpenSecrets of giving to the first Trump inauguration found that more than half of the 63 federal contractors who gave won multimillion-dollar bids in 2017.
Among them:
-
For-profit prison operators, including CoreCivic and Geo Group, saw huge increases in contract awards.
David Rubenstein, the billionaire co-founder of the Carlyle Group, put it bluntly to The Times:
Big donors, he said, “would like to get the policies they believe in from the federal government — more oil drilling, easier antitrust policy, more favorable crypto policy, less bank oversight. They also want more support for helping American companies invest overseas, and have ready access to government officials.”
How Trump’s inauguration stacks up
The inauguration of Donald Trump as president will be a pricey and star-studded affair.
Carrie Underwood, Rascal Flatts and the Village People are set to perform. And Snoop Dogg headlined Friday’s black-tie “Crypto Ball,” a $2,500-a-ticket gala that hailed Trump as “the first crypto president.”
Inauguration celebrations have changed significantly over the course of American history: The more lavish the festivities, the greater the statement. On the unpretentious side were those for Thomas Jefferson and Jimmy Carter. The co-chairman of Carter’s inaugural committee told The Times that the goal was “an inauguration which is traditional but modest in one, not extravagant.”
Barack Obama declined corporate donations for his first inauguration (though he still managed 10 official balls and a performance by Jay-Z) before accepting them for his second inauguration. President Biden’s pandemic-marred inauguration ended with fireworks, but there were no galas.
Trump’s festivities may draw comparisons to those of Ronald Reagan, whose 1981 inauguration fund set a record by raising $8 million (about $29 million in today’s money). As The Times described the day:
In white and black tie, in sequins and sables and clouds of perfume, Republican revelers stepped out tonight to the most lavish series of inaugural balls ever held in the nation’s capital.
It was an evening of shiny black limousines and nostalgic swing bands, of glittery Hollywood celebrities and wealthy Western oil men. The aura of big money was everywhere.
We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to dealbook@nytimes.com.
Business
Uber, California lawyers say deal reached to avert dueling ballot initiative showdown
The state’s trial attorneys and Uber say they have reached a last-minute deal to scrap their dueling ballot measures and avert what was gearing up to be one of most expensive battles of the November election.
The deal, which comes a day after both measures qualified for the November ballot, has Uber agreeing to bulk up safety measures, while the trial attorneys will limit how much they can claim for lien-based medical treatment of victims who get in Uber or Lyft accidents, according to spokespeople for both sides of the campaign.
“Both sides agree: Californians deserve a system that’s safe, fair, and accountable,” read a joint statement from Uber and the Consumer Attorneys of California, a powerful attorney trade group. “This agreement protects patients from unnecessary treatment or getting overcharged, ensures access to medical care and legal representation, and strengthens safety measures.”
The agreement, finalized Thursday, means the ride-share giant will kill its ballot measure to cap how much attorneys can earn in vehicle collision cases and limit medical damages to rates based on insurance. Uber has argued that the costs for medical treatment done on a lien, which allows doctors to get paid from a cut of the plaintiff’s payout, far exceed what it would cost if the victim had used their own insurance.
In return, the Consumer Attorneys of California will cancel its competing ballot measure that sought to increase legal liability for ride-share companies if a passenger is sexually assaulted by a driver. The measure followed an investigation by the New York Times into sexual assault by drivers.
Both sides had poured tens of millions into the campaigns, plastering billboards across Los Angeles.
Lawyers claimed the fight had turned existential with the measure threatening to decimate the profit margin of many personal injury cases and leave drivers with small or thorny cases unable to find an attorney willing to take their case.
Spokespeople say the deal is predicated on their agreement being codified into a bill within the next week. Otherwise, they said, each side will move forward with its ballot measure.
Business
Commentary: A porn firm that a judge called a ‘copyright troll’ now has Meta in its sights — and it could win
This porn company made millions by shaming the little guys who downloaded its films. But now it’s going after Meta for copyright infringement.
It isn’t often that a lawsuit can make me smile, much less laugh out loud. The latest exception is Strike 3 Holdings vs. Meta Platforms, which is currently unfolding in San Jose federal court.
Two things are amusing about the case. One is that Meta, the giant social media company, is accused of copyright infringement for allegedly downloading 2,400 of the plaintiff’s movies to train its AI bots. If Meta loses, that would be a serious (and in my opinion, deserved) blow against AI companies that have used copyrighted materials without permission.
The second part of the joke is the identity of the plaintiff. Strike 3 Holdings, you see, makes porn. Moreover, for years it has pursued a plainly unscrupulous business model in which it sues individuals for allegedly downloading its movies without permission, and shames them into settling for a few thousand dollars at a pop.
While it is possible one or more Meta employees downloaded Plaintiffs’ videos, it is just as possible…that a ‘guest, or freeloader,’ or contractor, or vendor, or repair person—or any combination of such persons—was responsible for that activity.
— Meta points the finger at others for a porn scandal
Whether or not Strike 3 has a legitimate claim for copyright infringement, it doesn’t deserve your sympathy. The firm was flayed in 2018 by federal Judge Royce C. Lamberth of Washington, D.C., for engaging in what he labeled a “high-tech shakedown … smacking of extortion.” Lamberth called Strike 3 a “copyright troll” and threw out its lawsuit against an unidentified internet user for having treated his court “not as a citadel of justice, but as an ATM.”
When I wrote about this scheme in 2023, I counted more than 12,440 lawsuits that the Los Angeles-based firm had filed in federal courts coast-to-coast. The latest count, according to a Lexis search a defense lawyer ran for me, is more than 21,000. The vast majority were settled and closed within a few months of their filing, an indication that they were never meant to go to trial.
Now Strike 3 appears to have hooked a big fish. In the first significant ruling in its lawsuit against Meta, the firm scored a surprise win: On June 11, federal Judge Eumi K. Lee of San Jose denied Meta’s motion to dismiss the case. Meta’s defense, she wrote, “strains credulity.”
More about that in a moment. First, a few words about the litigants. Meta needs no introduction: Formerly known as Facebook and based in Menlo Park, Calif., Meta recorded a profit of $60.5 billion last year on $201 billion in revenue.
Strike 3 portrays itself as an avatar of “Hollywood style and quality” in its adult films, which it distributes through its streaming websites such as Blacked, Tushy, Vixen and Wifey. It has described Greg Landry, its former owner and house auteur, as the porn industry’s “answer to Steven Spielberg.”
Neither Meta nor Strike 3 responded to my request for comment beyond the claims and defenses in court filings.
As I reported in 2023, Strike 3 has flooded federal courts with cookie-cutter lawsuits alleging that defendants infringed its copyrights by downloading its movies via BitTorrent, an online service on which unauthorized content can be accessed by almost anyone with an internet connection. Its targets generally have been individuals with plenty to lose from being publicly outed as porn viewers.
“Given the nature of the films at issue,” a federal judge in Connecticut observed last year, “defendants may feel coerced to settle these suits merely to prevent public disclosure of their identifying information, even if they believe they have been misidentified.”
Strike 3’s letters to its target defendants have warned that the statutory penalty for willful copyright infringement is $150,000, but offer to make the case go quietly away for a few thousand bucks, which would be a fraction of the cost of hiring a defense lawyer, not to mention the downside of exposing oneself as a porn fiend.
J. Curtis Edmondson, a Portland, Ore., lawyer who won a case against Strike 3, estimated in 2023 that Strike 3 “pulls in about $15 million to $20 million a year from its lawsuits.” But financial data that could validate his estimate hasn’t surfaced in court records.
There’s nothing new about content owners’ aggressive pursuit of copyright infringers. The practice was pioneered by the Recording Industry Assn. of America, when the industry feared that unauthorized downloading of music through programs such as Napster threatened its very existence. From 2003 through 2008, the association sued some 35,000 alleged song pirates.
But it abandoned the strategy because its legal dragnet swept up sympathetic targets such as single mothers and teenage girls, creating a public relations disaster.
There followed the appearance of outright trolls such as Prenda Law Group, which posted porn films online as bait to attract downloaders, whom it then sued in what judges ultimately found to be sham lawsuits. Prenda principal John L. Steele even bragged publicly that Prenda had made nearly $15 million with its lawsuits. U.S. Judge Otis Wright II of Los Angeles put the kibosh to its practice by slapping the Prenda lawyers with stiff sanctions for contempt.
That brings us to Strike 3’s case against Meta, which it filed in July. Strike 3 hasn’t been accused of a Prenda-style fraud, since it does own the films at issue and its right to sue copyright infringers isn’t disputed. But its allegation that Meta downloaded its films to train its AI bots, rather than just for personal enjoyment, is a new wrinkle for an old issue.
Strike 3 says its lawsuit grew out of a separate case in which a witness testified that Meta had downloaded thousands of pirated books to train its LLaMA AI bots — that is, feeding the content into LLaMA for it to use to generate answers to user questions. (Numerous lawsuits have been filed against AI firms alleging similar infringement.)
Strike 3 says that case prompted it to look into whether Meta had downloaded any of its content. It says it discovered that 47 IP addresses owned by Meta — that is, digital identifiers of internet accounts — had downloaded its movies without permission.
In all, Strike 3 alleges, those Meta addresses downloaded at least 2,396 of its movies — almost its entire catalog — more than 6,000 times via BitTorrent. What’s more, Strike 3 says Meta then posted some of that content back onto BitTorrent to take advantage of BitTorrent’s “tit-for-tat” mechanism through which users can obtain faster download speeds by uploading content to the platform.
If Strike 3 were to prevail on all its claims for illicit downloading, it would be entitled to about $360 million in damages, observes Eric Fruits, an Oregon economist who has testified for the defense in some Strike 3 lawsuits.
One might ask why Meta might be downloading porn for any reason, bot-training or otherwise. Meta, in its defense filings, says Strike 3 has offered no proof that Meta, as a corporation, was responsible for the downloading. If it happened, Meta says, it would have been inadvertent.
“Tens of thousands of employees and innumerable contractors, visitors, and third parties access the internet at Meta every day,” it wrote in its motion to dismiss the case. “While it is possible one or more Meta employees downloaded Plaintiffs’ videos, it is just as possible … that a ‘guest, or freeloader,’ or contractor, or vendor, or repair person — or any combination of such persons — was responsible for that activity.” The “sporadic downloads,” Meta says, “exhibit the hallmarks of personal use,” not corporate strategy.
This defense has borne fruit in other Strike 3 cases, in which defendants successfully argued simply having an IP address that was used to infringe wasn’t enough to prove they committed the infringements.
Strike 3 says it can show that the downloads weren’t the work of random users. Some downloads, it says, were coordinated among several Meta IP addresses, all based on the same algorithmic keywords and occurring simultaneously, suggesting that the infringements “took place within Meta’s walls.”
On Dec. 15, 2022, for instance, downloads apparently based on the keyword “teen” involved not only the movies “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” and “Teen Titans Go to the Movies,” but also “Teen Sex Sessions 2” and “Teens love Tats XXX,” according to Lee’s ruling. Other simultaneous downloads swept up episodes of “The Big Bang Theory” and “Ted Lasso” out of order, though a putative human user would probably have downloaded them sequentially.
“It strains credulity,” Lee ruled, “to suggest that these correlations are mere coincidence and the product of individual human selections.” Rather, the use of an algorithm would account for “why pornography was downloaded alongside children’s cartoons and sitcoms. … The odds that multiple people using the Corporate IP addresses … coincidentally torrented the same show, rather than simply streaming it, on the exact same day strains belief.”
The case is still at an early stage. For Strike 3, the lawsuit offers the potential of a big score. But Meta has signaled that it’s not inclined to roll over like a family man caught downloading skin flicks and worrying about his reputation at home and around town.
This time, Strike 3 may have a fight on its hands with a defendant that has money to burn.
Business
Rivian lays off hundreds of workers days after new vehicle deliveries begin
Rivian said it’s laying off hundreds of employees, or less than 2% of its workforce, as part of restructuring efforts aimed at making the company profitable for the first time.
The layoffs come one week after the Irvine-based electric vehicle maker began deliveries of its highly anticipated R2 SUV.
The company is hoping that the R2, which is currently only available as a performance version for $57,990, could attract more customers with its lower price tag.
But industry analysts said the performance R2 is still not affordable for many Americans, and investors reacted with disappointment to the first deliveries June 9, with shares falling 7% that day. On Wednesday, Rivian shares gained .33 points, or 2%, to close at $16.26.
The company said a standard version of the R2 starting at $44,990 will become available next year.
The layoffs took effect on Monday and affected Rivian’s service and customer organization employees, including sales and marketing teams. Rivian employed 15,232 people as of December.
“We recently restructured a handful of teams within Rivian as we work to profitably scale our business,” a company spokesperson said.
The laid off employees have been provided with severance packages and are encouraged to apply for other open roles with Rivian, the company said.
Rivian may be trying to reach profitability by saving money on labor, said Ivan Drury, director of insights at Edmunds.
“You have to wonder to what degree they do plan on replacing those people with some level of AI and automation,” he said.
Rivian, which is pouring money into autonomous vehicle efforts including a robotaxi partnership with Uber, has struggled to turn a profit with its luxury EVs.
The layoffs are likely not directly tied to recent reception of the R2, auto analyst Brian Moody said.
“I think that it’s declining interest in new electric cars, and maybe declining interest in expensive things,” he said. “We can surmise that [layoff] process began long before the R2 launch.”
The company lost $3.6 billion last year and recently said it is no longer expecting to meet its 2027 adjusted core profit target.
There has been a broad cooling of the EV market. Major automakers including Honda and Ford have cut back their EV options as excitement for the vehicles has fallen under the Trump administration. A $7,500 EV tax credit for new vehicles expired in September.
Rivian cut 4.5% of its workforce in October, or more than 600 jobs, following the expiration of the credit. The company also laid off about 200 employees in September.
In a recent turnaround, Rivian surprised the market with strong earnings results in February, reporting gross profits for 2025 of $144 million compared with a net loss in 2024 of $1.2 billion. Gross profit is revenue without subtracting the cost of production expenses.
In its earnings release, Rivian credited the swing to “strong software and services performance, higher average selling prices, and reductions in cost per vehicle.”
“The company has never posted a full year’s worth of profit, and this is the one lever they can pull to rightsize things,” Drury said.
-
Delaware3 minutes agoFrom blueprint to breakthrough: Tackling affordable housing in Wilmington
-
Florida10 minutes agoWeather Aware Day declared for Friday as heat and strong storms threaten Central Florida
-
Georgia13 minutes agoDHS appears to axe plan to construct immigration detention megacenter in small Georgia town
-
Hawaii18 minutes agoAmbassadors of aloha: Food events aim to boost tourism with unique Hawaii-made products
-
Idaho25 minutes ago
Idaho State Police arrest Dillon Thorpe on rape, child enticement charges in Elmore County
-
Illinois28 minutes agoBeecher City farm suffers heavy damage following ‘wicked storm’
-
Indiana33 minutes agoBraun asks regulators to reconsider $71 million AES rate increase
-
Kansas38 minutes agoMixed results for Kansas City World Cup start as some businesses struggle