LimeWire, the filesharing service that set the internet ablaze in the 2000s before being shut down for copyright infringement, said Tuesday that is acquiring the rights to Fyre Festival.

And it appreciates the irony.

‘LimeWire Acquires Fyre Festival Brand — What Could Possibly Go Wrong?’ the company titled its news release.

LimeWire said it would “unveil a reimagined vision for Fyre — one that expands beyond the digital realm and taps into real-world experiences, community, and surprise.” The company offered no additional details about how the Fyre brand will be relaunched.

For years, LimeWire operated as a competitor to fellow file-sharing platform Napster before being effectively shut down by a court ruling in 2010 after a judge ruled it had facilitated large-scale copyright violations. In 2022, Austrian brothers Julian and Paul Zehetmayr bought LimeWire’s intellectual property and turned it into an NFT service.

Fyre Festival was a 2017 music festival that saw ticket buyers spend thousands of dollars for a weekend in the Bahamas only to be met with a logistics debacle that included portable bathrooms taking the place of regular toilets, and low-budget food options that betrayed promises of celebrity chef fare. Organizer Billy McFarland was later convicted of fraud and sentenced to six years in prison.

“Fyre became a symbol of hype gone wrong, but it also made history,” LimeWire CEO Julian Zehetmayr said. “We’re not bringing the festival back — we’re bringing the brand and the meme back to life. This time with real experiences, and without the cheese sandwiches.”

LimeWire said its bid was backed by Maximum Effort, the creative agency co-founded by the actor and entrepreneur Ryan Reynolds.

“Congrats to LimeWire for their winning bid for Fyre Fest,” Reynolds said in the release. “I look forward to attending their first event but will be bringing my own palette of water.”

Fast-food restaurants are losing breakfast customers to convenience stores.

Morning meal traffic to fast-food chains rose 1% in the three months ended in July, while visits to food-forward convenience stores climbed 9% in the same period, according to market research firm Circana.

“Over the long run, convenience stores have taken share, really at foodservice overall, but the morning meal has been their strong suit,” David Portalatin, Circana senior vice president and foodservice industry advisor, told CNBC, noting the trend has largely been driven by what the group calls “food-forward convenience stores.”

For decades, McDonald’s and its rivals have tried to lure consumers away from home to eat their early morning offerings, betting that convenience and unique items will win over diners.

While fast-food chains have made some inroads, 87% of what consumers eat and drink in the morning comes from their own refrigerators or pantries, according to Portalatin. That leaves plenty of opportunity for fast-food chains — and anyone else who wants a slice of the breakfast pie.

Before the pandemic, fast-food chains started seeing a new rival for their breakfast customers: convenience stores. Regional chains like Wawa in the Northeast and Casey’s General Store in the Midwest were expanding their reach and investing in their foodservice options, taking pages from the fast-food companies’ own playbooks.

For a time, lockdowns and the shift to hybrid work reversed those market share gains. But in the three months ended in July, food-forward convenience stores once again gained the upper hand in the battle to serve consumers breakfast, according to Portalatin.

Circana separates food-forward convenience stores like Buc-ee’s and Sheetz from the broader industry, although more chains may soon fit under that umbrella. 7-Eleven, the biggest convenience, or c-store, in the U.S., is planning to invest more in its prepared foods business, inspired by the success of its Japanese business. C-store chain RaceTrac on Wednesday announced that it’s buying Potbelly for about $566 million, although it’s unclear what its plans for the sandwich chain include beyond expanding its footprint.

In recent years, more diners have been watching their budgets, conscious of rising menu prices and a tight job market.

Year-over-year morning traffic to fast-food chains has fallen every quarter for the last three years, according to data from Revenue Management Solutions, which advises restaurants on how to increase sales and profits. In the second quarter, fast-food breakfast visits fell 8.7%.

To see the struggles, look no further than McDonald’s, which dominates the quick-service breakfast category.

″The breakfast daypart is the most economically sensitive daypart, because it’s the easiest daypart of a stressed consumer to either skip breakfast or choose to eat breakfast at home,” McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski said on the company’s earnings call in late July. “And we, as well as the rest of the industry, are seeing that the breakfast daypart is absolutely the weakest daypart in the day.”

McDonald’s morning visits accounted for 33.5% of its traffic in the first half of 2019 but fell to 29.9% in the first half of 2025, according to Placer.ai data. To try to drum up traffic, the chain has included breakfast items in its new Extra Value Meals, including a deal for a Sausage McMuffin with Egg with a hash brown and a small coffee for $5.

To reverse breakfast’s slide, fast-food chains are taking hints from their competition. After years of convenience stores looking to fast-food chains for ideas on how to grow prepared food sales, from installing ordering kiosks to new menu items, the dynamic has flipped.

″[Quick-service restaurants] are looking at late-night sales and early morning sales, and they are directly looking at convenience stores and saying, ‘What is working? How can we bring that to our stores?’” National Association of Convenience Stores spokesperson Jeff Lenard told CNBC.

Prepared foods have offered a lifeline for convenience stores as demand for gasoline, tobacco and lottery tickets has fallen over time. The industry’s overall foodservice sales reached $121 billion in 2024, according to data from the NACS.

Most customers visit the gas pump during the morning and evening rush hours, on their way to and from work, presenting the perfect opportunity for c-stores to sell them breakfast or dinner. This year, 72% of consumers surveyed by InTouch Insight said they saw c-stores as a real alternative to fast-food chains, up from 56% a year ago and 45% two years ago.

Broadly, the c-stores that have focused on fresh food have been winning over more customers.

For example, Wawa has seen its customer base grow by 11.5% since 2022, while fast-food chains McDonald’s, Burger King and Wendy’s have seen their combined customer base shrink 3.5% in the same time, according to data from Indagari, a transaction data analytics firm.

The majority of 1,170 respondents to an InTouch Insight survey for CNBC said that they have purchased made-to-order breakfast from a c-store in the morning in the past three months. Forty-eight percent of respondents said that when they choose breakfast from a convenience store, they are replacing a visit that they might otherwise make to a fast-food restaurant like McDonald’s or Dunkin’.

Buying coffee and breakfast from a c-store likely won’t be cheaper than making it at home. But consumers perceive it as “good bang for their buck,” according to Sarah Beckett, vice president of sales and marketing for InTouch Insight.

Plus, c-store customers get a wider breadth of options. In addition to coffee, gas stations sell energy drinks, protein shakes and yogurt smoothies. And customers can pick up a granola bar or banana to accompany their breakfast sandwich. Fast-food chains lack that kind of variety.

But above all, what matters to consumers is the food itself.

“While [a] convenience store broadly does have some tailwind from being a lower price point, the ultimate differentiator, and what’s really going to set apart the winners from losers, is that quality aspect of it,” Circana’s Portalatin said.

Brady Caviness, a 33-year-old account executive at Bailiwick who lives in Minneapolis, told CNBC that he indulges in a breakfast pizza from Casey’s General Store when he’s traveling. If he’s back home, where there isn’t a Casey’s nearby, he’ll stop by McDonald’s, Dunkin’ or Starbucks if he’s in the mood to buy his breakfast.

The Iowa-based chain is the country’s third-largest c-store chain and claims to be the fifth-largest pizza concept based on its number of locations. Casey’s reported same-store sales growth of 5.6% for its prepared food and dispensed beverages for the three months ended July 31.

Like Taco Bell’s Mexican Pizza, Casey’s breakfast pizza, topped with cheese, scrambled eggs and a choice of bacon, sausage or vegetables, has grown a cult following since its launch in 2001.

“I think Casey’s is kind of a unique thing,” Caviness said. “My whole life, I’ve had the Egg McMuffins.”

The Labor Department has announced an inquiry into the Bureau of Labor Statistics over recent changes to its data practices.

In a letter published Wednesday, the office of the inspector general for the Labor Department cited the BLS’ recent decision to reduce data collection activities for two key inflation reports, as well as the large downward revision in employment estimates it announced Tuesday. It said it is reviewing the ‘challenges’ the agency has faced ‘in collecting and reporting closely watched economic data.’

The probe comes one month after President Donald Trump fired the head of the BLS as part of a broader pressure campaign that critics say has risked politicizing a part of the government that has long played a crucial role in the business world. The BLS, which is tasked with collecting data on economic indicators such as jobs and inflation, had generally been left alone by previous administrations.

But Trump began zeroing in on the BLS as his frustrations with the Federal Reserve mounted, coinciding with economic numbers that started to warn about a broader U.S. slowdown.

Since then, the labor market has slowed considerably. Just before the head of the BLS was fired, the department released a weaker-than-expected jobs report, citing claims of data manipulation that critics say are unfounded.

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, another frequent target of Trump’s, has said Fed policymakers are ‘getting the data that we need to do our jobs’ and stressed the importance of the federal statistical agencies.

‘The government data is really the gold standard in data,’ he added. ‘We need it to be good and to be able to rely on it.’

Trump then nominated E.J. Antoni, an economist with the far-right Heritage Foundation, as the new head of the BLS, a move many economists have criticized.

Trump and other BLS critics have focused on the department’s revisions to its reports, a practice that dates back decades and has been generally seen as a necessary part of the challenge of collecting near-term economic data. It has also faced other challenges in data collection, including budget challenges and low response rates to its collection efforts.

The BLS previously said the decision to reduce inflation data surveys was necessary given existing budget constraints. Meanwhile, mainstream economists say the latest downward revisions — while large — are part of a routine annual process known as benchmarking.

While response rates to the bureau’s surveys have been declining, researchers recently found that revisions and falling response rates did not reduce the reliability of the jobs and inflation reports.

Shares of Kenvue fell more than 10% on Friday after a report that Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will likely link autism to the use of the company’s pain medication Tylenol in pregnant women.

HHS will release the report that could draw that link this month, The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday.

That report will also suggest a medicine derived from folate — a water-soluble vitamin — can be used to treat symptoms of the developmental disorder in some people, according to the Journal.

In a statement, an HHS spokesperson said, “We are using gold-standard science to get to the bottom of America’s unprecedented rise in autism rates.”

“Until we release the final report, any claims about its contents are nothing more than speculation,” they added.

Tylenol could be the latest widely used and accepted treatment that Kennedy has undermined at the helm of HHS, which oversees federal health agencies that regulate drugs and other therapies. Kennedy has also taken steps to change vaccine policy in the U.S., and has amplified false claims about safe and effective shots that use mRNA technology.

Kennedy has made the disorder a key focus of HHS, pledging in April that the agency will “know what has caused the autism epidemic” by September and eliminate exposures. He also said that month that the agency has launched a “massive testing and research effort” involving hundreds of scientists worldwide that will determine the cause.

In a statement, Kenvue said it has “continuously evaluated the science and [continues] to believe there is no causal link” between the use of acetaminophen, the generic name for Tylenol, during pregnancy and autism.

The company added that the Food and Drug Administration and leading medical organizations “agree on the safety” of the drug, its use during pregnancy and the information provided on the Tylenol label.

The FDA website says the agency has not found “clear evidence” that appropriate use of acetaminophen during pregnancy causes “adverse pregnancy, birth, neurobehavioral, or developmental outcomes.” But the FDA said it advises pregnant women to speak with their health-care providers before using over-the-counter drugs.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists maintains that acetaminophen is safe during pregnancy when taken as directed and after consulting a health-care provider.

Some previous studies have suggested the drug poses risks to fetal development, and some parents have brought lawsuits claiming that they gave birth to children with autism after using it.

But a federal judge in Manhattan ruled in 2023 that some of those lawsuits lacked scientific evidence and later ended the litigation in 2024. Some research has also found no association between acetaminophen use and autism.

In a note on Friday, BNP Paribas analyst Navann Ty said the firm believes the “hurdle to proving causation [between the drug and autism] is high, particularly given that the litigation previously concluded in Kenvue’s favor.”

The average rate on the 30-year fixed mortgage dropped 16 basis points to 6.29% Friday, according to Mortgage News Daily, following the release of a weaker-than-expected August employment report.

It’s the lowest rate since Oct. 3 and the biggest one-day drop since August 2024. Rates are finally breaking out of the high 6% range, where they’ve been stuck for months.

“This was a pretty straightforward reaction to a hotly anticipated jobs report,” said Mortgage News Daily Chief Operating Officer Matt Graham. “It’s a good reminder that the market gets to decide what matters in terms of economic data, and the bond market has a clear voting record that suggests the jobs report is always the biggest potential source of volatility for rates.”

Graham said in a post on X that many lenders are “priced better” than Oct. 3 and would be quoting in the high 5% range.

The drop is a major change from May, when the rate on the 30-year fixed peaked at 7.08%. It’s big for buyers out shopping for a home today, especially given high home prices.

Take, for example, someone purchasing a $450,000 home, which is just above August’s national median price, using a 30-year fixed mortgage with a 20% down payment. Not including taxes or insurance, the monthly payment at 7% would be $2,395. At 6.29%, that payment would be $2,226, a difference of $169 per month.

That might not sound like a lot to some, but it can mean the difference in not just affording a home, but qualifying for a mortgage.

Homebuilder stocks reacted favorably Friday, with names like Lennar, DR Horton and Pulte all up roughly 3% midday. Homebuilding ETF ITB has been running hot for the last month as rates slowly moved lower. It’s up close to 13% in the past month.

The big question is whether the drop in rates will be enough to get homebuyers back in the market.

Mortgage demand from homebuyers, an early indicator, have yet to respond to gradually improving rates. Applications for a mortgage to purchase a home last week were 6.6% lower from four weeks before, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association.

“Homebuyers grapple with a lack of affordability, sellers contend with more competition, and builders deal with lower buyer demand,” Danielle Hale, chief economist at Realtor.com, said Friday in a statement after the release of the August employment report. “These conditions haven’t spelled catastrophe, but have created a cruel summer for the housing market.”

Some analysts have argued that buyers need to see mortgage rates in the 5% range before it really makes a difference. Home prices remain stubbornly high, and while the gains have definitely cooled, they are not yet coming down on a national level. In addition, uncertainty about the state of the economy and the job market has left many would-be buyers on the sidelines.

David Ellison continues to put his stamp on Paramount after its acquisition by Skydance.

The CEO and chairman told employees Thursday that they will be expected to work in the office five days a week starting Jan. 5, 2026, according to a memo obtained by CNBC. Employees who do not wish to make the transition can seek a buyout starting Thursday and until Sept. 15.

“To achieve what we’ve set out to do — and to truly unlock Paramount’s full potential — we must make meaningful changes that position us for long-term success,” Ellison wrote to staffers. “These changes are about building a stronger, more connected, and agile organization that can deliver on our goals and compete at the highest level. We have a lot to accomplish and we’re moving fast. We need to all be rowing in the same direction. And especially when you’re dealing with a creative business like ours, that begins with being together in person.”

The move could help Paramount thin the herd ahead of looming staffing cuts.

Variety reported last month that the company is expected to lay off between 2,000 and 3,000 employees as part of its postmerger cost-cutting measures. These cuts are slated for early November, Variety reported.

Paramount is looking to take $2 billion in costs out of the conglomerate amid advertising losses and industrywide struggles with traditional cable networks.

Phase one of Ellison’s back-to-work plan will see employees in Los Angeles and New York returning to a full five-day workweek in the new year.

Phase two will focus on offices outside LA and New York, including international locations. A similar buyout program will be offered in 2026 for those who operate in these locations.

“We recognize this represents a significant change for many, and we’re committed to supporting you throughout this transition,” Ellison wrote. “We will work closely with managers to ensure you have the time and flexibility to make the necessary adjustments.”

When Tim Cook gifted President Donald Trump a gold and glass plaque last month, the Apple CEO was hailed by Wall Street for his job managing the iPhone-maker’s relationship with the White House.

Cook, Wall Street commentators said, had largely navigated the threat of tariffs on Apple’s business successfully by offering Trump an additional $100 billion U.S. investment, a win the president could tout on American manufacturing. But despite the 24-carat trophy Cook handed Trump, the true costs of those tariffs may finally show up for Apple customers later this month.

“Thank you all, and thank you President Trump for putting American innovation and American jobs front and center,” Cook said at the event, which brought Apple’s total planned spend to $600 billion in the U.S. over the next five years. Trump, at the event, said that Apple would be exempt from forthcoming tariffs on chips that could double their price.

But as Apple prepares to announce new iPhones on Tuesday, some analysts are forecasting the company to raise prices on its devices even after all Cook has done to avoid the worst of the tariffs.

“A lot of the chatter is: Will the iPhone go up in price?” said CounterPoint research director Jeff Fieldhack.

Although smartphones haven’t seen significant price increases yet, other consumer products are seeing price increases driven by tariffs costs, including apparel, footwear, and coffee. And the tariffs have hit some electronics, notably video games — Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo, have raised console prices this year in the U.S.

Some Wall Street analysts are counting on Apple to follow. Jeffries analyst Edison Lee baked in a $50 price increase into his iPhone 17 average selling price projections in a note in July. He’s got a hold rating on Apple stock.

Goldman Sachs analysts say that the potential for price increases could increase the average selling price of Apple’s devices over time, and the company’s mix of phones have been skewing toward more expensive prices.

Analysts expect Apple to release four new iPhone models this month, which will likely be named the “iPhone 17” series. Last year, Apple released four iPhone 16 models: the base iPhone 16 for $829, the iPhone 16 Plus at $899, the iPhone 16 Pro at $999 and the iPhone 16 Pro Max at $1,199.

This year, many supply chain watchers expect Apple to replace the Plus model, which has lagged the rest of the lineup, with a new, slimmer device that trades extra cameras and features for a thinner, lighter body.

The “thinner, lighter form factor may drive some demand interest,” wrote Goldman analysts, but tradeoffs like battery life may make it hard to compete with Apple’s entry-level models.

Analysts have said they expect the slim device to cost about $899, similar to how much the iPhone 16 Plus costs, but they haven’t ruled out a price bump. That would still undercut Samsung’s thin Galaxy Edge, which debuted earlier this year at $1,099.

Apple did not respond to a request for comment.

When Trump announced sweeping tariffs on China and the rest of the world in February, it seemed like Apple was in the crosshairs.

Apple famously makes the majority of its iPhones and other products in China, and Trump was threatening to place tariffs that could double Apple’s costs or more. Some of Trump’s so-called “reciprocal” tariffs would hit countries like Vietnam and India where Apple had hedged its production bets.

But seven months later, Apple has weathered the tariffs better than many had imagined.

The U.S. government has paused the most draconian Chinese tariffs several times, smartphones got an exemption from tariffs and Cook in May told investors that the company was able to rearrange its supply chain to import iPhones to the U.S. from India, where tariffs are lower.

Cook also successfully leaned on his relationship with Trump, visiting him in White House and taking his side in August, when Cook presented the shiny keepsake to Trump. That commitment bolstered Trump’s push to bring more high-tech manufacturing to the U.S. In exchange, Trump said he would exempt Apple from a forthcoming semiconductor tariff, too. And Trump’s IEEPA tariffs were ruled illegal in late August, although they are still in effect.

Apple hasn’t completely missed the tariff consequences. Cook said the company spent $800 million on tariff costs in the June quarter, mainly due to the IEEPA-based tariffs on China. That was less than 4% of the company’s profit, but Apple warned it could spend $1.1 billion in the current quarter on tariff expenses.

After months of eating the tariff costs itself, Apple may finally pass those costs to consumers with this month’s launch of the iPhone 17 models.

Apple has been judicious about hardware price increases in the U.S. The smaller Pro phone, for example, hasn’t gotten a price increase since its debut in 2017, holding at $999. But Apple has made some price changes.

The company raised the price of its entry level phones from $699 to $829 in 2020. And in 2022 when Apple eliminated the smaller iPhone Mini that started at $699, the company replaced it with the bigger-screen Plus that costs $899. The Pro Max also got a hike in 2023 when Apple bumped it from $1,099 to its current price of $1,199.

If Apple does increase prices on its phones this year, don’t expect management to blame tariffs.

The average selling price of smartphones around the world is rising, according to IDC. The price of smartphone components, such as the camera module and chips, have been increasing in recent years.

Apple is much more likely to focus on highlighting its phones’ new features and quietly note the new price. Analysts expect the new iPhones to have larger screens, increased memory and new, faster chips for AI.

“No one’s going to come out and say it’s related to tariffs,” said IDC analyst Nabila Popal.

One way that Apple could subtly raise prices is by eliminating the entry-level version of its phones, forcing users to upgrade to get more storage at a higher starting price. Apple typically charges $100 to double the amount of the iPhone’s storage from 128GB to 256GB.

That’s what JPMorgan analysts expect Apple to announce next week.

They forecast that Apple will leave the prices of the entry level and high-end Pro Max models alone, but they wrote that they expect the company to eliminate the entry-level version of the Pro, meaning that users will have to pay $1,099 for an iPhone 17 Pro that has more starting-level storage than its predecessor. That’s how Apple raised the price of the entry-level Pro Max in 2023.

“However, with Apple’s recent announcements relative to investments in US, the assumption is that the company will largely be shielded from tariffs, driving expectations for limited pricing changes except for those associated with changes in the base storage configuration for the Pro model,” wrote JP Morgan analyst Samik Chatterjee.

When Cook was asked about potential Apple price increases on an earnings call in May, he said there was “nothing to announce.”

“I’ll just say that the operational team has done an incredible job around optimizing the supply chain and the inventory,” Cook said.

The Walt Disney Company will pay $10 million to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations that it enabled the unlawful collection of children’s personal data on YouTube.

The FTC claimed the company allowed data to be collected from kids who viewed videos directed at children on YouTube without notifying parents or obtaining their consent.

The complaint alleged that Disney violated the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule by not labeling some YouTube videos as being made for children. The agency claimed the company was able to collect data from viewers of child-directed content who were under the age of 13 and use it for targeted advertising.

In 2019, after a settlement with the FTC, YouTube began requiring content creators to list whether uploaded videos were “made for kids” or “not made for kids.” The designation ensures that personal information is not collected from the “made for kids” videos and personalized ads will not be served to viewers. Comments are also disabled on those videos.

The proposed settlement would require Disney to pay a $10 million civil penalty, comply with the children’s data protection rule and implement a program to review whether videos posted to YouTube should be designated as “made for kids.”

“Supporting the well-being and safety of kids and families is at the heart of what we do,” the company said in a statement obtained by CNBC. “This settlement does not involve Disney owned and operated digital platforms but rather is limited to the distribution of some of our content on YouTube’s platform. Disney has a long tradition of embracing the highest standards of compliance with children’s privacy laws, and we remain committed to investing in the tools needed to continue being a leader in this space.”

Axios was the first to report the settlement.

Families who lost loved ones in two crashes of Boeing 737 Max jetliners may get their last chance to demand the company face criminal prosecution Wednesday. That’s when a federal judge in Texas is set to hear arguments on a U.S. government motion to dismiss a felony charge against Boeing.

U.S. prosecutors charged Boeing with conspiracy to commit fraud in connection with the crashes that killed 346 people off the coast of Indonesia and in Ethiopia. Federal prosecutors alleged Boeing deceived government regulators about a flight-control system that was later implicated in the fatal flights, which took place less than five months apart in 2018 and 2019.

Boeing decided to plead guilty instead of going to trial, but U.S. District Chief Judge Reed O’Connor rejected the aircraft maker’s plea agreement in December. O’Connor, who also will consider whether to let prosecutors dismiss the conspiracy charge, objected to diversity, equity and inclusion policies potentially influencing the selection of an independent monitor to oversee the company’s promised reforms.

Lawyers representing relatives of some of the passengers who died cheered O’Connor’s decision, hoping it would further their goal of seeing former Boeing executives prosecuted during a public trial and more severe financial punishment for the company. Instead, the delay worked to Boeing’s favor.

The judge’s refusal to accept the agreement meant the company was free to challenge the Justice Department’s rationale for charging Boeing as a corporation. It also meant prosecutors would have to secure a new deal for a guilty plea.

The government and Boeing spent six months renegotiating their plea deal. During that time, President Donald Trump returned to office and ordered an end to the diversity initiatives that gave O’Connor pause.

By the time the Justice Department’s criminal fraud section briefed the judge in late May, the charge and the plea were off the table. A non-prosecution agreement the two sides struck said the government would dismiss the charge in exchange for Boeing paying or investing another $1.1 billion in fines, compensation for the crash victims’ families, and internal safety and quality measures.

The Justice Department said it offered Boeing those terms in light of “significant changes” Boeing made to its quality control and anti-fraud programs since entering into the July 2024 plea deal.

The department also said it thought that persuading a jury to punish the company with a criminal conviction would be risky, while the revised agreement ensures “meaningful accountability, delivers substantial and immediate public benefits, and brings finality to a difficult and complex case whose outcome would otherwise be uncertain.”

Judge O’Connor has invited some of the families to address the court on Wednesday. One of the people who plans to speak is Catherine Berthet, whose daughter, Camille Geoffrey, died at age 28 when a 737 Max crashed shortly after takeoff from Ethiopia’s Addis Ababa Bole International Airport.

Berthet, who lives in France, is part of a group of about 30 families who want the judge to deny the government’s request and to appoint a special prosecutor to take over the case.

“While it is no surprise that Boeing is trying to buy everyone off, the fact that the DOJ, which had a guilty plea in its hands last year, has now decided not to prosecute Boeing regardless of the judge’s decision is a denial of justice, a total disregard for the victims and, above all, a disregard for the judge,” she said in a statement.

Justice Department lawyers maintain the families of 110 crash victims either support a pre-trial resolution or do not oppose the non-prosecution agreement. The department’s lawyers also dispute whether O’Connor has authority to deny the motion without finding prosecutors acted in bad faith instead of the public interest.

While federal judges typically defer to the discretion of prosecutors in such situations, court approval is not automatic.

In the Boeing case, the Justice Department has asked to preserve the option of refiling the conspiracy charge if the company does not hold up its end of the deal over the next two years.

Boeing reached a settlement in 2021 that protected it from criminal prosecution, but the Justice Department determined last year that the company had violated the agreement and revived the charge.

The case revolves around a new software system Boeing developed for the Max. In the 2018 and 2019 crashes, the software pitched the nose of the plane down repeatedly based on faulty readings from a single sensor, and pilots flying then-new planes for Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines were unable to regain control.

The Transportation Department’s inspector general found that Boeing did not inform key Federal Aviation Administration personnel about changes it made to the MCAS software before regulators set pilot training requirements for the Max and certified the airliner for flight.

Acting on the incomplete information, the FAA approved minimal, computer-based training for Boeing 737 pilots, avoiding the need for flight simulators that would have made it more expensive for airlines to adopt the latest version of the jetliner.

Airlines began flying the Max in 2017. After the Ethiopia crash, the planes were grounded worldwide for 20 months while the company redesigned the software.

In the final weeks of Trump’s first term, the Justice Department charged Boeing with conspiring to defraud the U.S. government but agreed to defer prosecution and drop the charge after three years if the company paid a $2.5 billion settlement and strengthened its ethics and legal compliance programs.

The 2021 settlement agreement was on the verge of expiring when a panel covering an unused emergency exit blew off a 737 Max during an Alaska Airlines flight over Oregon at the beginning of last year. No one was seriously injured, but the potential disaster put Boeing’s safety record under renewed scrutiny.

A former Boeing test pilot remains the only individual charged with a crime in connection with the crashes. In March 2022, a federal jury acquitted him of misleading the FAA about the amount of training pilots would need to fly the Max.

Alphabet’s Google must share data with rivals to open up competition in online search, a judge in Washington ruled on Tuesday, while rejecting prosecutors’ bid to make the internet giant sell off its popular Chrome browser and Android operating system.

Google CEO Sundar Pichai expressed concerns at trial in the case in April that the data-sharing measures sought by the U.S. Department of Justice could enable Google‘s rivals to reverse-engineer its technology.

Google has said previously that it plans to file an appeal, which means it could take years before the company is required to act on the ruling.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta also barred Google from entering into exclusive agreements that would prohibit device makers from preinstalling rival products on new devices.

Google had argued that loosening its agreements with device makers, browser developers and mobile network operators was the only appropriate remedy in the case. Its most recent deals with device makers Samsung Electronics and Motorola and wireless carriers AT&T and Verizon allow them to load rival search offerings, according to documents shown at trial in April.

The ruling results from a five-year legal battle between one of the world’s most profitable companies and its home country, the U.S., where Mehta ruled last year that the company holds an illegal monopoly in online search and related advertising.

At a trial in April, prosecutors argued for far-reaching remedies to restore competition and prevent Google from extending its dominance in search to artificial intelligence.

Google said the proposals would go far beyond what is legally justified and would give away its technology to competitors.

In addition to the case over search, Google is embroiled in litigation over its dominance in other markets.

The company recently said it will continue to fight a ruling requiring it to revamp its app store in a lawsuit won by “Fortnite” maker Epic Games.

And Google is scheduled to go to trial in September to determine remedies in a separate case brought by the Justice Department where a judge found the company holds illegal monopolies in online advertising technology.

The Justice Department’s two cases against Google are part of a larger bipartisan crackdown by the U.S. on Big Tech firms, which began during President Donald Trump’s first term and includes cases against Meta Platforms, Amazon and Apple.