मनोरंजन

By Jonathan Stempel NEW YORK (Reuters) -Martin Shkreli must face a lawsuit by a digital art collective that owns a one-of-a-kind album by the hip-hop group Wu-Tang Clan, and accused the convicted former pharmaceutical executive of copying the album and playing it online without permission. In a 32-page decision on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Pamela Chen said Shkreli must face claims he misappropriated "Once Upon a Time in Shaolin" from the PleasrDAO collective, which paid about $4 million for the album in 2021. PleasrDAO is a decentralized group that buys what its members view as culturally significant materials. The Brooklyn judge dismissed some other claims, including two she said were preempted by federal copyright law. Shkreli paid $2 million for "Shaolin" in 2015, but gave it up to partially satisfy a $7.4 million forfeiture order stemming from his 2017 conviction for defrauding hedge fund investors and scheming to defraud investors in a drugmaker. In a statement on Friday, Shkreli's lawyer Edward Paltzik called the dismissal of some claims "a significant step forward in our effort to vindicate Mr. Shkreli, who we unequivocally believe engaged in absolutely zero wrongdoing." PleasrDAO is seeking unspecified damages and profits, and for Shkreli to return "Shaolin" copies he may still have. It sued Shkreli in June 2024, after he allegedly admitted in livestreams to copying "Shaolin" and playing it for his followers, and responded "LOL i have the mp3s you moron" when a PleasrDAO member posted a photo of the album on X. Steven Cooper, a lawyer for PleasrDAO, said Chen's decision lets the collective "fully and aggressively" pursue its case. DIFFERENT FROM PRINCE, JANET JACKSON SONGS Chen said PleasrDAO plausibly alleged it employed reasonable steps to preserve the album's secrecy, including armed security guards and constant video surveillance. She also found "no serious debate" that the album's value was based mainly on its secret and exclusive nature. Chen distinguished the album from unreleased songs by Prince and Janet Jackson that other judges found were not protectible trade secrets. "The independent economic value of the album comes from plaintiff's ability to exploit its exclusivity to create an 'experience' that its competitors cannot, rather than from a public commercial release or from traditional forms of music distribution" for Prince's and Jackson's songs, Chen wrote. She said PleasrDAO "has sufficiently alleged that the album is cloaked with a 'substantial element of secrecy'" to survive Shkreli's dismissal motion. Shkreli, 42, gained the nickname "Pharma Bro" when, as chief executive of Turing Pharmaceuticals in 2015, he raised the price of the life-saving antiparasitic drug Daraprim overnight to $750 per tablet from $17.50. He was released early from his seven-year prison sentence, and banned from the pharmaceutical industry in 2022. The case is PleasrDAO v. Shkreli, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, No. 24-04126. (Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Richard Chang)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

By Milana Vinn (Reuters) -Electronic Arts, the videogame publisher behind titles such as "FC" and "Battlefield", is in advanced talks to go private at a valuation of roughly $50 billion, according to sources familiar with the matter. A group of investors including private equity firm Silver Lake, Saudi Arabia's PIF and Jared Kushner's Affinity Partners could unveil a deal for the publisher as soon as next week, the sources said on Friday. If it goes through, the deal would mark the largest ever leveraged buyout in history. Shares of EA were up more than 15% in afternoon trading. The gaming industry has been grappling with soaring development costs and intensifying competition, while trying to meet high fan expectations amid a broader drop-off in discretionary consumer spending. EA, which has a market valuation of over $42 billion, had forecast quarterly net bookings below Wall Street expectations in July. But the company is betting on "Battlefield 6", the latest installation in the popular shooter game title, to boost bookings and challenge Activision Blizzard's "Call of Duty" franchise. Set to launch in EA's current fiscal year, "Battlefield 6" is expected to sell millions of copies. Large-cap M&A is also rebounding in 2025 as boardroom confidence, consolidation logic and cheaper capital are finally lining up again. Goldman Sachs president John Waldron had said earlier in the week CEOs and boards were "stepping out" after a two-year lull, with U.S. megadeals leading the charge and expected Fed rate cuts easing the cost of capital, conditions that make it easier to pursue scale, synergies, and strategic repositioning through mergers rather than organic investment alone. EA, Affinity Partners and PIF did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. Silver Lake declined to comment. The publisher had launched "College Football 26" in July, hoping to build on the success of last year's edition, which became one of the best-selling titles of 2024. The Wall Street Journal had first reported on the deal talks earlier on Friday. Silver Lake has long been known for major technology buyouts and is one of the largest tech-focused private equity firms. It had recently acquired a majority stake in Intel's Altera for $4.46 billion. Meanwhile, PIF, as part of Saudi's "Vision 2030" strategy, has diversified beyond oil, with big investments in gaming and other sports, among other sectors. Affinity Partners, founded by U.S. President Donald Trump's son-in-law Kushner, has investments from funds in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. (Reporting by Juby Babu in Mexico City and Deborah Sophia in Bengaluru; Editing by Krishna Chandra Eluri)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

By Milana Vinn and Zaheer Kachwala (Reuters) -Electronic Arts, the videogame publisher behind titles such as "FC" and "Battlefield", is in advanced talks to go private at a valuation of roughly $50 billion, according to sources familiar with the matter. A group of investors including private equity firm Silver Lake, Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund and Jared Kushner's Affinity Partners could unveil a deal for the publisher as soon as next week, the sources said on Friday. If it goes through, the deal would mark the largest ever leveraged buyout in history. The take-private offer comes at a crucial time for EA, which is banking heavily on its core sports portfolio and action shooter intellectual property to weather a sluggish videogame industry as gamers get picky with spending. EA's hopes rest heavy on "Battlefield 6", the latest installation in the popular shooter game franchise that has been lauded by fans for its detailed visuals and intense combat and which many analysts expect will sell millions of copies, as well as on its soccer title "FC 26". The deal to take EA private would also mark further consolidation within the industry, after titans such as Activision Blizzard and Zynga were swooped up by even larger firms, further reducing the number of publicly listed videogame companies. "EA does make sense as an acquisition target – the cash flows are fairly consistent and EA's annualized titles make for predictable revenue/profitability," D.A. Davidson & Co analyst Wyatt Swanson said. Shares of EA closed around 15% higher on Friday. Large-cap M&A is also rebounding in 2025 as boardroom confidence, consolidation logic and cheaper capital are finally lining up again. Goldman Sachs president John Waldron had said earlier in the week CEOs and boards were "stepping out" after a two-year lull, with U.S. megadeals leading the charge and expected Fed rate cuts easing the cost of capital, conditions that make it easier to pursue scale, synergies, and strategic repositioning through mergers rather than organic investment alone. EA, Affinity Partners and PIF did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. Silver Lake declined to comment. Affinity Partners, founded by U.S. President Donald Trump's son-in-law Kushner, has investments from funds in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Silver Lake has long been known for major technology buyouts and is one of the largest tech-focused private equity firms. The Wall Street Journal had first reported on the deal talks earlier on Friday. SAUDI'S INCREASING BETS ON GAMING PIF is Saudi's sovereign wealth fund and has bought or made major investments in videogame firms through its gaming arm, Savvy Games Group, in a bid to increase its influence in the largest entertainment industry in the world. The investments are also a part of Saudi's "Vision 2030" strategy to diversify the Kingdom's economy beyond oil. Analysts believe PIF's interest in EA stems from its highly recognizable sports portfolio which includes the widely popular soccer franchise "FC", which has a strong appeal worldwide and carries robust revenue potential. "For Saudi Arabia's PIF, the deal would cement games as cultural infrastructure — assets as critical to global influence as sports or film," said Joost van Dreunen, games professor at NYU Stern School of Business. Along with videogames, the Kingdom has invested heavily in esports and competitive gaming, with its esports foundation having announced a new nation-focused tournament next year, of which EA is a partner. (Reporting by Juby Babu in Mexico City and Deborah Sophia in Bengaluru; Editing by Krishna Chandra Eluri)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

By Akash Sriram and Harshita Mary Varghese (Reuters) -President Donald Trump said on Monday he would impose a 100% tariff on all films produced overseas that are then sent into the U.S., repeating a threat made in May that would upend Hollywood's global business model. The step signals Trump's willingness to extend protectionist trade policies into cultural industries, raising uncertainty for studios that depend heavily on cross-border co-productions and international box-office revenue. "Our movie making business has been stolen from the United States of America, by other Countries, just like stealing candy from a baby," Trump said in a post on his Truth Social. However, it was not immediately clear what legal authority Trump would use to impose a 100% tariff on foreign-made films. The White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on how the tariffs would be implemented. Top U.S. studios Warner Bros Discovery, Paramount Skydance and Netflix also did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Comcast declined to comment. "There is too much uncertainty, and this latest move raises more questions than answers," said PP Foresight analyst Paolo Pescatore. "For now, as things stand, costs are likely to increase, and this will inevitably be passed on to consumers," he said. The president had first floated the idea of a movie tariff in May but offered few details, leaving entertainment executives unsure whether it would apply to specific countries or all imports. Shares of Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros Discovery were down 2.1% and 1.3%, respectively. FROM AUSTRALIA TO CANADA Studio executives told Reuters earlier this year that they were "flummoxed" by how a movie tariff might be enforced, given that modern films often use production, financing, post-production and visual effects spread across multiple countries. Hollywood has increasingly relied on overseas production hubs such as Canada, the UK and Australia, where tax incentives have attracted big-budget shoots for films ranging from superhero blockbusters to streaming dramas. At the same time, co-productions with foreign studios have become more common, particularly in Asia and Europe, where local partners provide financing, access to markets, and distribution networks.  Industry executives also warn that a broad tariff could affect the thousands of U.S. workers employed on overseas shoots, from visual effects artists to production crews, whose work is often coordinated across multiple countries. (Reporting by Akash Sriram and Harshita Mary Varghese in Bengaluru; Editing by Shilpi Majumdar)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

By Akash Sriram and Harshita Mary Varghese (Reuters) -President Donald Trump said on Monday he would impose a 100% tariff on all films produced overseas that are then sent into the U.S., repeating a threat made in May that would upend Hollywood's global business model. The step signals Trump's willingness to extend protectionist trade policies into cultural industries, raising uncertainty for studios that depend heavily on cross-border co-productions and international box-office revenue. "Our movie making business has been stolen from the United States of America, by other Countries, just like stealing candy from a baby," Trump said in a post on his Truth Social. However, it was not immediately clear what legal authority Trump would use to impose a 100% tariff on foreign-made films. The White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on how the tariffs would be implemented. Top U.S. studios Warner Bros Discovery, Paramount Skydance and Netflix also did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Comcast declined to comment. "There is too much uncertainty, and this latest move raises more questions than answers," said PP Foresight analyst Paolo Pescatore. "For now, as things stand, costs are likely to increase, and this will inevitably be passed on to consumers," he said. The president had first floated the idea of a movie tariff in May but offered few details, leaving entertainment executives unsure whether it would apply to specific countries or all imports. Shares of Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros Discovery were down 2.1% and 1.3%, respectively. FROM AUSTRALIA TO CANADA Studio executives told Reuters earlier this year that they were "flummoxed" by how a movie tariff might be enforced, given that modern films often use production, financing, post-production and visual effects spread across multiple countries. Hollywood has increasingly relied on overseas production hubs such as Canada, the UK and Australia, where tax incentives have attracted big-budget shoots for films ranging from superhero blockbusters to streaming dramas. At the same time, co-productions with foreign studios have become more common, particularly in Asia and Europe, where local partners provide financing, access to markets, and distribution networks.  Industry executives also warn that a broad tariff could affect the thousands of U.S. workers employed on overseas shoots, from visual effects artists to production crews, whose work is often coordinated across multiple countries. (Reporting by Akash Sriram and Harshita Mary Varghese in Bengaluru; Editing by Shilpi Majumdar)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

By Jonathan Stempel NEW YORK (Reuters) -Martin Shkreli must face a lawsuit by a digital art collective that owns a one-of-a-kind album by the hip-hop group Wu-Tang Clan, and accused the convicted former pharmaceutical executive of copying the album and playing it online without permission. In a 32-page decision on Thursday, U.S. District Judge Pamela Chen said Shkreli must face claims he misappropriated "Once Upon a Time in Shaolin" from the PleasrDAO collective, which paid about $4 million for the album in 2021. PleasrDAO is a decentralized group that buys what its members view as culturally significant materials. The Brooklyn judge dismissed some other claims, including two she said were preempted by federal copyright law. Shkreli paid $2 million for "Shaolin" in 2015, but gave it up to partially satisfy a $7.4 million forfeiture order stemming from his 2017 conviction for defrauding hedge fund investors and scheming to defraud investors in a drugmaker. In a statement on Friday, Shkreli's lawyer Edward Paltzik called the dismissal of some claims "a significant step forward in our effort to vindicate Mr. Shkreli, who we unequivocally believe engaged in absolutely zero wrongdoing." PleasrDAO is seeking unspecified damages and profits, and for Shkreli to return "Shaolin" copies he may still have. It sued Shkreli in June 2024, after he allegedly admitted in livestreams to copying "Shaolin" and playing it for his followers, and responded "LOL i have the mp3s you moron" when a PleasrDAO member posted a photo of the album on X. Steven Cooper, a lawyer for PleasrDAO, said Chen's decision lets the collective "fully and aggressively" pursue its case. DIFFERENT FROM PRINCE, JANET JACKSON SONGS Chen said PleasrDAO plausibly alleged it employed reasonable steps to preserve the album's secrecy, including armed security guards and constant video surveillance. She also found "no serious debate" that the album's value was based mainly on its secret and exclusive nature. Chen distinguished the album from unreleased songs by Prince and Janet Jackson that other judges found were not protectible trade secrets. "The independent economic value of the album comes from plaintiff's ability to exploit its exclusivity to create an 'experience' that its competitors cannot, rather than from a public commercial release or from traditional forms of music distribution" for Prince's and Jackson's songs, Chen wrote. She said PleasrDAO "has sufficiently alleged that the album is cloaked with a 'substantial element of secrecy'" to survive Shkreli's dismissal motion. Shkreli, 42, gained the nickname "Pharma Bro" when, as chief executive of Turing Pharmaceuticals in 2015, he raised the price of the life-saving antiparasitic drug Daraprim overnight to $750 per tablet from $17.50. He was released early from his seven-year prison sentence, and banned from the pharmaceutical industry in 2022. The case is PleasrDAO v. Shkreli, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, No. 24-04126. (Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Richard Chang)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

(Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday he would impose a 100% tariff on all foreign-made movies, an unprecedented move that threatens to upend Hollywood's global business model. The step signals Trump's willingness to extend protectionist trade policies into cultural industries, raising uncertainty for studios that depend heavily on international box-office revenue and cross-border co-productions. Trump announced the measure in a post on his Truth Social platform, claiming U.S. movie-making is losing ground to international competition. "Our movie making business has been stolen from the United States of America, by other Countries, just like stealing candy from a baby," he wrote. However, it was not immediately clear what legal authority Trump would use to impose a 100% tariff on foreign-made films. White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on how the tariffs would be implemented. Warner Bros Discovery, Comcast, Paramount Skydance and Netflix also did not immediately respond to requests. Shares of Netflix were down 1.5% in early trading. The president had first floated the idea of a movie tariff in May but offered very little details, leaving entertainment executives unsure whether it would apply to specific countries or all imports. Studio executives told Reuters earlier this year that they were "flummoxed" by how a movie tariff might be enforced, given that modern films often use production, financing, post-production and visual effects spread across multiple countries. The move has drawn skepticism from legal and trade analysts. Some argue films are a form of intellectual property and part of the global trade in services, an area where the U.S. often runs a surplus, raising questions about the legal basis for tariffs. Co-productions with foreign studios have also become more common, adding to doubts about how such films would be classified. (Reporting by Akash Sriram in Bengaluru; Editing by Shilpi Majumdar)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

(Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday he would impose a 100% tariff on all foreign-made movies, an unprecedented move that threatens to upend Hollywood's global business model. The step signals Trump's willingness to extend protectionist trade policies into cultural industries, raising uncertainty for studios that depend heavily on international box-office revenue and cross-border co-productions. Trump announced the measure in a post on his Truth Social platform, claiming U.S. movie-making is losing ground to international competition. "Our movie making business has been stolen from the United States of America, by other Countries, just like stealing candy from a baby," he wrote. However, it was not immediately clear what legal authority Trump would use to impose a 100% tariff on foreign-made films. White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on how the tariffs would be implemented. Warner Bros Discovery, Comcast, Paramount Skydance and Netflix also did not immediately respond to requests. Shares of Netflix were down 1.5% in early trading. The president had first floated the idea of a movie tariff in May but offered very little details, leaving entertainment executives unsure whether it would apply to specific countries or all imports. Studio executives told Reuters earlier this year that they were "flummoxed" by how a movie tariff might be enforced, given that modern films often use production, financing, post-production and visual effects spread across multiple countries. The move has drawn skepticism from legal and trade analysts. Some argue films are a form of intellectual property and part of the global trade in services, an area where the U.S. often runs a surplus, raising questions about the legal basis for tariffs. Co-productions with foreign studios have also become more common, adding to doubts about how such films would be classified. (Reporting by Akash Sriram in Bengaluru; Editing by Shilpi Majumdar)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

(Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday he would impose a 100% tariff on all foreign-made movies, an unprecedented move that threatens to upend Hollywood's global business model. The step signals Trump's willingness to extend protectionist trade policies into cultural industries, raising uncertainty for studios that depend heavily on international box-office revenue and cross-border co-productions. Trump announced the measure in a post on his Truth Social platform, claiming U.S. movie-making is losing ground to international competition. "Our movie making business has been stolen from the United States of America, by other Countries, just like stealing candy from a baby," he wrote. However, it was not immediately clear what legal authority Trump would use to impose a 100% tariff on foreign-made films. White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment on how the tariffs would be implemented. Warner Bros Discovery, Comcast, Paramount Skydance and Netflix also did not immediately respond to requests. Shares of Netflix were down 1.5% in early trading. The president had first floated the idea of a movie tariff in May but offered very little details, leaving entertainment executives unsure whether it would apply to specific countries or all imports. Studio executives told Reuters earlier this year that they were "flummoxed" by how a movie tariff might be enforced, given that modern films often use production, financing, post-production and visual effects spread across multiple countries. The move has drawn skepticism from legal and trade analysts. Some argue films are a form of intellectual property and part of the global trade in services, an area where the U.S. often runs a surplus, raising questions about the legal basis for tariffs. Co-productions with foreign studios have also become more common, adding to doubts about how such films would be classified. (Reporting by Akash Sriram in Bengaluru; Editing by Shilpi Majumdar)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)

(Reuters) -The United States will impose a 100% tariff on all movies made outside the country, U.S. President Donald Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Monday. "Our movie making business has been stolen from the United States of America, by other Countries, just like stealing 'candy from a baby'," he said on Monday. Trump had threatened to impose such levies earlier in May but offered few details, leading to confusion among entertainment industry executives. Shares of Netflix and Warner Bros Discovery were down 1.4% and 0.6%, respectively, in premarket trading. (Reporting by Akash Sriram in Bengaluru; Editing by Shilpi Majumdar)

(The article has been published through a syndicated feed. Except for the headline, the content has been published verbatim. Liability lies with original publisher.)