Business
Trump’s Cryptocurrency Surges to Become One of the World’s Most Valuable
The Trump family’s new crypto token surged in just two days to become one of the most valuable forms of digital currency in the world, creating the potential for a multibillion-dollar payout to the family but also generating a storm of questions about the conflicts of interest the new venture creates.
President-elect Donald J. Trump announced the launch of the new token, $Trump, on Friday night as hundreds gathered for a crypto-inspired inauguration ball not far from the White House.
The venture won praise by some as a sign of how digital currencies are now going mainstream in the United States.
But economists and even some longtime crypto investors said the new digital coin, known as a memecoin, might also emerge as a landmark moment in the speculative history of crypto trading and the potential dangers it poses to the financial system. Memecoins are a type of cryptocurrency tied to an online joke or a celebrity mascot.
“If people want to gamble, I don’t really care,” said Lee Reiners, a former Federal Reserve economist who is now a lecturer for a center studying global economic markets at Duke University. “What I care about is when this crypto bubble bursts — and it will burst — it will end up impacting people across the economy even if they don’t have direct investment in crypto. And this new coin is making it worse.”
Eric Trump, one of Mr. Trump’s sons, who helped launch the token, declined to comment on Sunday.
At least on paper, the Trump tokens in the market as of Sunday late afternoon had a total trading value of nearly $13 billion, and a total of $29 billion worth of trades had taken place in just two days. That calculation is based on the nearly $64 value of each of the 200 million tokens issued, according to CoinGecko, an industry data tracker.
This suggests, as of Sunday, that Mr. Trump’s coin was the 19th most valuable form of cryptocurrency in the world, the CoinGecko tally indicated.
The Trump affiliates appear to control another 800 million tokens that, at least hypothetically, could be worth as much as $51 billion — a total that would make Mr. Trump one of the richest people in the world.
Before the coin started trading, Forbes had listed Mr. Trump’s net worth as $6.7 billion, most of that coming from Trump Media and Technology Group, another speculative venture the Trump family helped start, which runs the money-losing social media platform Truth Social.
The Trump family late on Sunday moved to add a second new crypto token, this one called $Melania, with Mr. Trump and Melania, his wife, both promoting it on Truth Social, just as Mr. Trump was about to start a rally in Washington celebrating his inauguration.
“The official Melania Meme is live!” the social media posting said.
That move then coincided with a dive in the value of Mr. Trump’s own token, dropping to as low as $41, before starting to rise again, as doubts appeared to emerge over just how valuable these new tokens would actually be. Mr. Trump did not appear to be deterred.
“Bitcoin has shattered one record after another,” Mr. Trump said at his rally, referring to another form of cryptocurrency. He added during his remarks that “these are all investments that are only being made because we won the election.”
But Mr. Trump’s newfound crypto wealth would likely vaporize if he moved to sell his trove of coins. New cryptocurrencies often shoot up in price, making traders billionaires on paper, only to collapse when the coins’ holders start selling.
That is especially true of memecoins, which are prone to rapid swings in price as their internet popularity fluctuates. Prices can also vary across platforms, making it difficult to pin down a coin’s actual value. In 2021, one of the first memecoins, a dog-based digital currency called Dogecoin, minted millionaires overnight, only to lose much of its value just as quickly.
The launch of the Trump memecoin caught many of the industry’s power brokers off guard.
When the president-elect announced the coin on Friday night, hundreds of the most influential executives in the industry were drinking cocktails and singing along to Snoop Dogg at an inauguration party in Washington dubbed the Crypto Ball. (One executive who attended the ball said he was “annoyed” that trading in the coin had begun while the industry’s leaders “weren’t paying attention,” making it difficult for them to profit.)
Nonetheless, some traders have already cashed in.
Within a minute of the coin’s launch, a crypto trader had accumulated a $1 million position, according to an analysis of public transaction data by the crypto data firm Bubblemaps, which posted its findings on social media.
The coin’s price surged, and the trader’s account soon sold off holdings worth $20 million. The analysis prompted speculation on social media about whether an insider with advance knowledge of the coin’s launch had been able to make quick profits. (Bubblemaps did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)
Conor Grogan, a director at Coinbase, one of the largest trading platforms in the United States, estimated in a social media post that as of Saturday, the Trump team had made $58 million in fees from all of the $Trump sales — even without selling its own reserve of tokens to the open marketplace.
It also appears that the Trump team may be transferring some of its tokens onto an overseas trading platform called Bybit, which is not allowed to execute trades in the United States, Mr. Grogan noted. Bybit has recently been the focus of enforcement actions by international cryptocurrency regulators.
The Trump coin’s launch immediately created new opportunities for executives, crypto traders and even major companies to curry favor with the Trump administration.
Anyone can spin up a memecoin for a few dollars, and the vast majority of the tokens are not available to buy and sell on mainstream digital currency marketplaces, which often focus on larger, more established coins. But within hours of Mr. Trump’s announcement, the crypto exchange Kraken began offering the new coin, and Coinbase, the largest exchange in the United States, said it would also list it.
Coinbase and Kraken are fighting lawsuits filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission, which conducted a wide-ranging crackdown on crypto firms during the Biden administration. The companies are among a large group of crypto firms that stand to benefit from the more relaxed approach to tech regulation that Mr. Trump promised on the campaign trail.
A onetime crypto skeptic, Mr. Trump embraced the digital currency industry last year, giving a speech at a major industry conference in which he promised to turn the United States into the “crypto capital of the planet.”
After winning the election, Mr. Trump made a series of moves that appear poised to benefit the crypto industry. He chose someone to lead the S.E.C. who has a track record of working closely with crypto companies, and tapped the venture capitalist David Sacks, a digital currency enthusiast, to oversee crypto and artificial intelligence policy for his administration.
At the Crypto Ball, Mr. Sacks announced from the stage that “the reign of terror against crypto is over, and the beginning of innovation in America for crypto has just begun,” according to a video posted on social media by Eric Trump.
The president-elect’s family was personally invested in the crypto market even before the memecoin launched. In September, he and his sons helped start a crypto business, World Liberty Financial, that also has a digital coin associated with it, WLFI.
World Liberty is not directly owned by the Trumps. But Mr. Trump is a promoter of the venture, and he receives a cut of the profits from token sales.
For the most part, the crypto industry has responded enthusiastically to Mr. Trump’s crypto ventures. But some executives expressed concern this weekend that the memecoin launch would end up hurting amateur traders.
A popular crypto podcaster called it a “gratuitous cash grab” that would be “bad for humanity.” Erik Voorhees, a prominent Bitcoin investor, wrote on social media that the memecoin was “stupid and embarrassing.”
Still the Trump family’s embrace of cryptocurrencies shows no sign of slowing down.
“It’s time to celebrate everything we stand for: WINNING!” Mr. Trump wrote on Friday as he announced the birth of the new crypto token. “Join my very special Trump Community. GET YOUR $TRUMP NOW.”
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.
-
Atlanta, GA3 minutes ago18 essential Atlanta restaurants, from neighborhood gems to MICHELIN-starred destinations
-
Minneapolis, MN10 minutes agoHmong in Minnesota: 50 Years of Resilience
-
Indianapolis, IN13 minutes ago1 critical after shooting on near east side of Indianapolis
-
Pittsburg, PA18 minutes agoSportsNet Pittsburgh parts ways with Penguins rinkside reporter Hailey Hunter after three seasons
-
Augusta, GA25 minutes agoProgress continues on James Brown Linear Park in downtown Augusta
-
Washington, D.C28 minutes agoVans Warped Tour Day One at RFK Festival Grounds in Washington, DC – Loud Hailer Magazine
-
Cleveland, OH33 minutes agoViolent crime crackdown leads to 11 felony arrests and gets eight guns off Cleveland’s streets
-
Austin, TX40 minutes ago
7 Juneteenth celebrations happening in Austin this weekend