Summary: Writers Guild files lawsuit in San Francisco federal court Paramount's $110 billion acquisition challenged by writers union Writers Guild cites reduced competition and wage suppression risks The Writers Guild of America sued on July 14 to block Paramount's $110 billion acquisition of Warner Bros Discovery, saying the deal would jeopardize writers' livelihoods and threaten the health of U.S. entertainment. The case is another blow to Paramount's bid to become a bigger rival to Netflix and Disney, a day after California and 11 other states sued to block the deal. Paramount, which argued the combination would increase opportunities for writers, must now deal with a double dose of legal work. The Writers Guild said in its lawsuit filed in San Francisco federal court that the deal would reduce the number of buyers in Hollywood for films and TV shows, harming its members. “With fewer competitors, the merged Paramount-Warner Bros. entity would have both the incentive and the ability to lower costs by suppressing writers’ wages and reducing output. Writers will be paid less and have fewer employment opportunities,” the WGA complaint said. The union, made up of the Writers Guild of America West and Writers Guild of America East, has 18,000 members across the entertainment industry. The Writers Guild said that by combining two of five major Hollywood studios, the merger would unlawfully concentrate demand for writers of top-grossing films and episodic television series, and decrease the bargaining power of writers who enter exclusive deals with studios. The Writers Guild pointed to a case brought by the U.S. Department of Justice that successfully blocked Penguin Random House's bid to buy rival Simon & Schuster, on grounds that it would hinder competition in the market for top-selling books and lower advances paid to authors. That case hinged on the argument that the combined company would control close to half the market for publishing, an effective monopsony that would leave hundreds of individual authors with fewer options and less leverage.

Summary: 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reverses dismissal Expert testimony from Harvard Dean Andrea Baccarelli reinstated Over 500 private lawsuits against Kenvue revived   A federal appeals court on July 13 revived more than 500 private lawsuits against Tylenol maker Kenvue over the painkiller's alleged link to autism. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan said a district court judge improperly excluded expert testimony from three doctors offered by parents and guardians who tied Tylenol use during pregnancy to autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children. There is no firm scientific evidence of such a link. The issue drew greater attention after President Donald Trump and top U.S. health officials in September suggested a link to autism. In a 64-page decision for a three-judge panel, Circuit Judge Guido Calabresi said the testimony from the three doctors, including the dean of Harvard University's School of Public Health, reflected methodologies used by other scientists, and "constitute acceptable interpretations of scientific evidence where scientists may, and in fact do, disagree." Calabresi stressed that the appeals court was not deciding whether using acetaminophen causes autism or ADHD, or whether elected officials should do more to protect public health. Doctors and medical societies consider acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol, the preferred means to treat pain and fever during pregnancy. Many retailers and pharmacy operators including CVS, Kroger, Target, Walgreens and Walmart were also named as defendants. The appeals court said the doctors whose testimony was wrongly excluded included Harvard public health dean Andrea Baccarelli; Eric Hollander, a psychiatry professor at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, and Brandon Pearson, a toxicologist at Columbia University. "We are pleased that the panel unanimously found that our key experts reliably applied their scientific methods and principles," Ashley Keller, a lawyer for the parents, said in an email. Experts often play a key role in product liability lawsuits such as the Tylenol cases. The private lawsuits were dismissed in December 2024 by U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan, who criticized the methodology of the plaintiffs' expert witnesses. The decision on July 13 returns the lawsuits to Cote for further proceedings.

Summary: Apple filed suit in Northern District of California Former employees Chang Liu and Tang Yew Tan named Allegations include unauthorized access and confidential data misuse   Apple on July 10 sued OpenAI and two former employees, alleging misappropriation of its trade secrets to benefit the ChatGPT-owner's foray into consumer hardware, a dramatic escalation of already simmering tension between the two companies. The complaint accuses OpenAI of orchestrating a broad effort to systematically acquire and exploit Apple's confidential information through former employees, recruiting practices and supplier relationships to accelerate its push into the consumer hardware business. The lawsuit sets up a battle over who will control future AI devices that may not use traditional apps or operating systems — devices which, if successful, would direct consumer attention away from Apple's best-selling iPhone. Analysts believe OpenAI is working on a phone or other device of its own. Tensions between the two tech companies have strained their relationship, as the race to develop AI products has intensified competition for talent and proprietary technology. Apple's lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, comes just after OpenAI successfully fended off a legal challenge from Elon Musk's xAI. The two former Apple employees named in the suit are Chang Liu, a former senior system electrical engineer, and former vice president of product design for iPhone and Apple Watch, Tang Yew Tan. Neither immediately responded to a request for comment. Apple alleged that Liu failed to return a company-issued work laptop and later used an authentication bug to access Apple's internal network, downloading "dozens of Apple's confidential hardware-related files." The iPhone maker also claimed that OpenAI’s hardware chief Tan had been "methodically using Apple’s confidential information to benefit OpenAI" before his departure by emailing himself information about Apple suppliers and internal industry summaries. Tan worked on the iPhone for most of his 24-year tenure at Apple, according to his LinkedIn page. Apple alleged that Tan encouraged Apple employees to bring parts from Apple to job interviews at OpenAI for “show and tell” sessions, citing an incident in its filing where one OpenAI job candidate allegedly said that he “didn’t even know we could take those from the office.” OpenAI Foundation, OpenAI Group PBC, the company's commercial arm, and io Products, which OpenAI acquired, were also named as defendants.