bid

In one corner is bnb-side, a six-room bed and breakfast on the Isle of Portland – a tiny wedge of limestone tied by a narrow ribbon of shingle to the Dorset coast – that was created to help secure the future of the rock’s much-loved arts festival, b-side.

On the other is Airbnb, the San Francisco-based booking colossus. The battle between them is over the three little letters they share.

b-side says the “bnb” in bnb-side means what it has always meant: bed and breakfast. But lawyers for the Silicon Valley titan say the name of the guesthouse, perched on an outcrop just 4 miles long by 1.5 miles wide, threatens the global brand of the $100bn heavyweight.

“We thought the name was both really obvious and really cool,” said Rocca Holly-Nambi, director of b-side. “b-side was founded almost 20 years ago, so when we set up our BnB in 2024 to raise money for the festival, we just popped the ‘bn’ in front because it’s a universally recognised description of what we’re offering.”

Airbnb doesn’t agree. In May, it sent the first of three legal letters to the tiny social enterprise to demand it cease its attempt to register the B&B using the name it had used since it opened its doors.

“They won’t let us compromise by using a different case, an ampersand or an ‘and’,” said Holly-Nambi. “According to Airbnb, we can’t describe our BnB as a BnB at all.”

For bnb-side, losing the argument could mean more than abandoning a clever name. It would mean replacing signage and rewriting websites, social media and all other material referencing and advertising the B&B.

“That’s not just a huge waste of money – of which we don’t have much – and of the equally valuable time of our volunteers, but it would throw b-side’s core income stream into chaos,” said Holly-Nambi. “We’d have to painstakingly build our reputation and brand back up from scratch all over again.”

Raina Summerson, chair of b-side, is fuming and incredulous. “We opened bnb-side because we were completely dependent on public funding and wanted to be more financially secure,” she said. “bnb-side now generates almost half the festival’s annual £250,000 turnover. If it loses its name, we risk having to establish it all over again.”

Airbnb has opposed the name on three separate legal grounds: that consumers will confuse the two brands, that bnb-side could benefit from or damage Airbnb’s reputation, and that bnb-side will financially profit by misrepresenting itself as an official Airbnb service.

b-side is asking the Intellectual Property Office to reject Airbnb’s opposition in full, with costs awarded in their favour. The case is still under way, with no ruling having yet been made.

Airbnb’s claim has hit a nerve on the proud, windswept outcrop. Cat Wightman, manager of bnb-side, said: “It’s pretty bitter. We’ve watched other small, local hospitality businesses go under, and local people unable to afford homes here, who have been negatively affected by the force with which the Airbnb market has conquered Portland. One person owns eight properties on the island, all of which are rented out on Airbnb.”

b-side obtained pro bono advice and is working with the law firm Stevens Hewlett & Perkins to defend them, but the process is still intimidating. “It’s terrifying but we’re not going to back down,” said Holly-Nambi. “We do things differently here in Portland.”

Craig Beaumont, a trademark attorney and senior associate at Barker Brettell, a law firm that specialises in intellectual property, said that for all Airbnb’s might, this would not be an easy or straightforward win for them.

“This feels like an uphill battle they’re embarking on,” he said. “BnB has long been widely understood as shorthand for a descriptive phrase, and descriptive phrases are available for the public to use.”

bnb-side are not the only company who agree with Beaumont: Companies House records show that in the past decade 14 accommodation companies with “bnb” in their name successfully registered their businesses.

Darren Meale, a partner and trademark litigation specialist at Simmons & Simmons, said it was no surprise the term was used so often. “It’s quite punchy of Airbnb to say they’re so well-known that they can monopolise a term that they only incorporated into their name in the first place because it was a descriptive one that everyone immediately understood, and then say that someone else using the term is going to confuse customers and damage them.”

Lee Curtis, a partner and chartered trademark attorney at IP law firm HGF, agreed that Airbnb “may be testing the limits” of the law. But he pointed to another risk for the lodging colossus.

“There’s a public relations angle to take into account,” he said. “Some companies may welcome getting a reputation for aggressive enforcement but that can backfire when the target is a community organisation, like this one.”

Airbnb has been approached for comment.

One of the more remarkable streaks in the history of this nearly century-old racetrack is still alive.

It’s just not the one most people expected.

Gold Phoenix’s bid to join Kelso as the only horses to win the same major stakes race in North America in five straight years ended Saturday evening when the 8-year-old gelding finished fourth behind Test Score and two others in the $300,000 Del Mar Handicap.

“Got beat, I think less than a length, and got stopped there at the top of the lane,” trainer Phil D’Amato said. “That’s grass racing.”

More specifically, it’s grass racing at Del Mar against Graham Motion, the East Coast trainer who in recent years has been more successful here than a margarita concession stand.

Test Score was the eighth horse Motion has sent to Del Mar for a summer stakes race since 2022 — and the eighth to win.

“It’s crazy,” said assistant trainer Alice Clapham, who accompanied Test Score on his trip west. “It’s one of those things you just pinch yourself. You know it’s going to stop at some point but you just go along for the ride.”

Gold Phoenix’s owners know the feeling.

They never expected their gelding to win this race four straight times, an unprecedented feat at Del Mar, but each year since 2022 he found a way, prevailing three times by less than half a length and once by 1¼ lengths.

This time the 11-10 favorite found himself on the wrong side of a five-horse photo finish. He nosed out Mondego but was a head behind Atomic Age, who was half a length behind Atitlan, who was a neck behind Test Score. The winner, a son of Lookin at Lucky who is half Gold Phoenix’s age, paid $7.20 as the 13-5 second choice.

While disappointed, Gold Phoenix’s connections weren’t about to ask for condolences.

“We’re so grateful for everything that he has done, for all of us and the partners,” said Gary Fenton, managing partner of Little Red Feather Racing Stable. “He’s just a really, really special horse and today changes nothing.”

Said Billy Koch, Little Red Feather’s other managing partner: “It just didn’t work out the way we needed it to work out. He tries, though, every time. Can’t say anything but be proud of him.”

Koch said he had a feeling during the race that another win could be problematic. Gold Phoenix was near the back of the pack in the field of 11 until the far turn, when jockey Hector Berrios began urging him. The jockey had to hold him up just a bit as they came around the corner, though he had a clear run once he shifted toward the rail.

Test Score also rallied from behind but had a little smoother journey under Juan Hernandez and outdid the other closers.

“[Berrios] took a chance to go up in there,” D’Amato said. “It got a little tight but once he got through, he battled and we just got outrun.”

The final time of 2 minutes 14.76 seconds for 1-3/8 miles was the fastest since Gold Phoenix’s initial win (2:14.51). As part of the Breeders’ Cup Challenge Series, Test Score earned a fees-paid berth in the $5-million Breeders’ Cup Turf on Oct. 31 at Keeneland.

Fenton said the plan is to give Gold Phoenix another shot in that race, in which he’s finished fourth twice, fifth and 10th and earned $640,000 — about 25% of his career earnings of $2.6 million.

He won’t be the only Little Red Feather horse at Keeneland. Just a half-hour before Gold Phoenix’s race, Iron Man Cal pulled off an 8-1 upset in another Grade 2 race, the $250,000 Pat O’Brien. That win, in 1:22.02 for seven furlongs under Joel Rosario, guaranteed the 4-year-old gelding a berth in the Breeders’ Cup Dirt Mile.

The Friedkin Group, Everton‘s American owners, will be risking the fury of their own fanbase should they agree to the sale of Harrison Armstrong to Nottingham Forest.

The notion that Everton could even consider parting with Armstrong sparked an instant reaction of disbelief and anger among supporters, with the teenager regarded as their brightest home-grown prospect for years and a big hope for the future.

As yet, there are no indications that Everton will accept an offer, but Forest’s interest is real, although it would be a real coup should they pull it off.

It would also send out worrying signals about the scale of TFG’s ambitions.

Manager David Moyes has been frustrated by the club’s lack of incoming transfer activity this summer.

Moyes made it abundantly clear after Wednesday’s 4-0 Carabao Cup second-round win at Championship side Preston that he wanted reinforcements.

His hope was that TFG would provide backing for further arrivals.

Since then, however, Everton‘s main creator Iliman Ndiaye has been heavily linked with Manchester City, and now Forest are ready to test their resolve over Armstrong.

How Moyes would view, or indeed explain, such a sale, would be intriguing. It would appear totally at odds with his stated intention of building a better squad.

And while Everton and their support may have to accept their prize assets being spirited away by clubs such as Manchester City, the idea that their most promising young player could be taken away by Nottingham Forest – a club they would be expecting to challenge or even surpass – may be harder to stomach.

That is why the manner in which Everton handle Forest’s approach for Armstrong, who has already excelled this season, may be a defining moment for TFG and Moyes.

NEW YORK — A federal judge on Friday once again spurned President Trump’s effort to erase his hush money conviction, rejecting the president’s bid to move the state court case to federal court and have it dismissed on presidential immunity grounds.

Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein reiterated his earlier finding against Trump, saying that the reasons Trump cited for renewing his request were “neither new nor legally sufficient.”

The judge added: “He has failed to show good cause and diligence.”

It is the third time Hellerstein has blocked Trump from having the U.S. District Court in Manhattan seize control of the case from the New York court where he was tried and convicted.

And, like before, Trump will appeal, according to a spokesperson for his legal team who called Hellerstein’s ruling “baseless and lawless.”

“The Supreme Court’s historic decision on Immunity, the Federal and New York State Constitutions, and other established legal precedent mandate that the Witch Hunt perpetrated by the Manhattan DA be removed to federal court, and immediately overturned and dismissed,” a statement issued on behalf of the legal team said. “President Trump will be filing a powerful appeal, and will continue defeating Democrat weaponization at every turn.”

The guilty verdict, reached in May 2024 while Trump was between terms, made him the first former — and now current — U.S. president to be convicted of a crime. Trump is also challenging his conviction through the state court appellate process, which is pending.

Hellerstein’s decision came after a federal appeals court last year ordered him to reconsider his prior denial. The judge previewed his ruling during oral arguments in February, slamming Trump’s lawyers for legal maneuvers that amounted to taking “two bites at the apple.”

State prosecutors did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The case centered on a payment to Stormy Daniels

Trump was convicted in May 2024 of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal a $130,000 hush money payment to adult film actor Stormy Daniels, whose claim of a sexual encounter with Trump a decade earlier had threatened to upend his 2016 presidential campaign.

Trump was sentenced to an unconditional discharge, which left his conviction intact but spared him any punishment. He had long denied Daniels’ claim and said he did nothing wrong. He has sought to get the conviction overturned both by attempting to move the case to federal court and through the appeals process in state court, which is pending.

Hellerstein rejected Trump’s requests to move the case twice before. The first was after Trump’s March 2023 indictment. The second was after Trump’s trial, as his lawyers sought to nix his conviction in the wake of the Supreme Court’s July 2024 ruling that presidents and ex-presidents can’t be prosecuted for official acts and prosecutors can’t use official acts as evidence that unofficial actions were illegal.

Trump appealed Hellerstein’s post-trial ruling and, last November, the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the judge to reconsider his decision, finding that he had failed to consider “important issues relevant” to the president’s request to move the case.

A three-judge appellate panel said it expressed no view on how he should rule but instructed Hellerstein to closely review evidence that Trump claimed was related to official acts and whether Trump could argue those actions were taken as part of his White House duties.

The judges also instructed Hellerstein to determine if Trump had “diligently sought” to have the case moved to federal court and whether the case can even be moved to federal court now that Trump has been convicted and sentenced in state court.

The judge questioned the Trump legal team’s strategy

During oral arguments in February, Hellerstein took issue with the Trump legal team’s decision-making after the Supreme Court ruling.

Instead of immediately seeking to move the case to federal court, he noted, Trump’s lawyers first asked the trial judge in state court, Juan Merchan, to throw out the verdict on immunity grounds. Normally, such a request must be made within 30 days of an arraignment, but a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. has ruled that exceptions can be made if “good cause” is shown.

Trump, a Republican, did not attend the arguments.

Trump lawyer Jeffrey Wall argued that prosecutors rushed to trial instead of waiting for the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity decision and that Trump’s legal team was crunched for time after the high court’s ruling because his sentencing was scheduled for just 10 days later.

Trump’s lawyers did not ask Hellerstein to intervene until nearly two months later, while their request to Merchan was still pending. The judge called that a “strategic decision” and suggested that by going to the state court first, Trump’s lawyers cost him the right to pursue remedies in federal court.

“No, your honor,” Wall replied. “It is what any sensible litigant would do” in that situation.

“Not so,” Hellerstein replied.

“That is a decision on your part,” the judge added. “You didn’t have to do that. You could have come right to the federal court. Just by filing a notice of removal, there would be no sentencing.”

Trump’s lawyers “made a choice,” Hellerstein said, “and you sought two bites at the apple.”

In his written ruling Friday, Hellerstein said Trump was asking for a “‘second bite at the apple,’ a result the law disfavors.”

The judge added that “Trump’s delay in filing for removal constitutes a ‘quintessential strategic decision,’ and the ‘fact that he later came to view that decision as a poor one is not sufficient, by itself, to establish cause.’”

Sisak and Neumeister write for the Associated Press.

Judge blocks Trump’s mail voting rules for a second time, just days before ballots go out for the midterms.

A United States federal judge has for a second time blocked the Trump administration’s overhaul of election rules aimed at limiting voting by mail.

District Judge Indira Talwani late on Thursday blocked the US Postal Service’s new ballot rules for 14 days, hours after the agency said they had taken effect.

The ruling is part of an ongoing battle prompted by President Donald Trump’s bid to limit voting by mail, which is heating up as the US heads towards midterm elections in November that will decide control of Congress and the Senate.

Nearly a third of American voters cast votes by mail. The first ballots for the midterms are due to be sent out in about a week.

The new rules require states to submit approved voter lists and follow new ballot formatting before USPS can deliver voting slips. The restrictions were enacted on Thursday after the Supreme Court cleared the way for them.

Talwani wrote in a statement late on Thursday that states “have neither time nor funds” to redesign ballots, update election systems or train officials on the new USPS portal before the upcoming election.

The fight traces back to March, when Trump ordered the Postal Service to withhold ballots unless states supplied approved voter lists and new formatting rules.

Voting rights groups and democratic officials sued, arguing only states and Congress, not the president, can set election rules. Talwani agreed, blocking the rules over the summer.

On Monday, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority threw out that earlier ruling on a technicality, saying that the legal challenge on which it was based was filed too early.

Democratic officials and voting rights groups quickly refiled their challenge once the rules became official, allowing Talwani to block them once more in a late-night order.

Separately, attorneys general from 24 states filed a new lawsuit this week making the same core argument: that only the Senate and Congress, not the president, can have constitutional authority to set election rules.

A hearing on the refiled case is scheduled for September 3, just as ballots are set to go out. That timeline means whatever Talwani or a higher court decides next could take effect as voting begins, or after it is already under way.

BROWNSVILLE, Texas — A federal judge on Wednesday refused to order Texas to extradite an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer charged with shooting a man and lying about it during the immigration crackdown in Minneapolis.

Christian Castro is charged in Minnesota with assault and falsely reporting a crime in the Jan. 14 shooting of 24-year-old Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis. Minnesota authorities have sought his extradition since his arrest, but he remains in custody in Brownsville, Texas, a city bordering Mexico.

Under Texas law and barring extradition, Castro must be released after 90 days of detention, which is Thursday.

Minnesota Atty. Gen. Keith Ellison filed a request for a temporary restraining order last week, asking a federal judge to prevent the sheriff in Cameron County, Texas, from releasing Castro, and to order Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to sign his extradition warrant.

Minnesota officials believe Castro could flee the country, citing calls he made from jail to a woman in Mexico, talking “about marrying her and buying a house in Mexico when he is released,” according to the lawsuit.

Castro is accused of firing a gun through the front door of a Minneapolis home, shooting Sosa-Celis in the leg. Prosecutors say Castro also falsely accused Sosa-Celis and another man of attacking an ICE officer with a broom handle and a snow shovel.

At a federal hearing in Brownsville on Tuesday, attorneys with the Minnesota attorney general’s office argued it would be hard to compel Castro to face charges in their state if he was released, and they fear Castro may flee the country, citing his phone conversations.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said last week he would not respond to the extradition request, citing the ongoing investigation into fraud in government social service programs in Minnesota, which President Trump used to justify his immigration crackdown there.

Gonzalez writes for the Associated Press.

DANNY Cipriani and AnnaLynne McCord’s bid to crowdfund their wedding failed after friends refused to pay for booze at the reception.

The couple tied the knot on Saturday in Los Angeles in what was described as an “elegant bohemian” ceremony in their back garden.

However, just weeks before they were set to marry, they raised eyebrows when they asked their guests to help them pay for their wedding.

They used US site Honeyfund — a platform specifically designed to help couples pay for things like flowers, catering, music and a cake.

The couple asked for cash donations between £75 ($100) and £450 ($600) to go towards their wedding and honeymoon.

However, the website, which is open to the public to view, still has remaining slots that were not contributed to.

READ MORE ON DANNY & ANNALYNNE

GETTING RID

Danny Cipriani’s ex-wife sells off his rugby shirts & trophies as he weds again

DAN & WIFE

Danny Cipriani can’t keep his eyes off AnnaLynne McCord as they marry in LA

Among the remaining asks are eight £440 ($600) slots for the wedding venue construction, five remaining slots for reception beverages at £146 ($200) and seven remaining slots for the reception catering at £183 ($250).

Adding to this are five unpaid slots for the wedding photography at £220 ($300) and two remaining slots for the rehearsal dinner at £366 ($500).

Guests did in fact fork out £73 for their marriage licence, £91 for the music at their reception, £440 for the wedding cake and £440 for the floral arrangements.

After their crowdfunding idea was released, the pair were said to have received death threats.

Speaking from a hotel in Hollywood, AnnaLynne told The Sun: “I was told I was despicable — and that I was trying to extort money from my wedding guests.

“People actually donated ten dollars towards the wedding so they could write on the site that Danny and I were disgusting.

“There were even death threats.”

The 90210 actress, 39, stunned a see-through white lace dress and a veil embroidered with flowers on the big day over the weekend.

Meanwhile, rugby ace Danny, 38, looked dapper in all black suit.

Their wedding came 10 years after they first met on dating app Raya which kickstarted a four-year on/off relationship.

They then rekindled things in 2024 after Danny split from his wife Victoria Rose.

Incidentally, it was Danny calling AnnaLynne in 2020 to tell her that he’d got Victoria pregnant that led to their initial time together ending. The following year he married the neuroscience practitioner.

When Danny’s split from Victoria made headlines, AnnaLynne decided to make her feelings known and reached back out to him.

She told us: “He told me he loved me since the day he met me.”

Danny proved his love on Christmas Day when he dropped to one knee in front of the tree in AnnaLynne’s home.

Since Iraola replaced Arne Slot as Liverpool head coach, the Reds have signed Victor Munoz for £34.5m and Ronald Araujo on loan from Barcelona.

Jeremy Jacquet, the French centre-half, also arrived from Rennes in a deal worth £60m, but that was agreed back in January.

In terms of outgoings, Mohamed Salah, Andy Robertson and Ibrahima Konate all left the club over the summer while Curtis Jones is in Italy to complete a £30m move to Inter Milan.

Iraola added: “You are asking me what we need – there are certain situations that for me are clear – especially now on the wing because we don’t have enough players specific to play in those positions.

“And then in other positions, I think we have to be open-minded in the market to see situations that honestly can improve our team.

“It’s not about signing because we need a player here. No, it’s about improving the squad. And we have very good players already here, so to improve our very good players, you need like a specific level of player, yes.”

In a separate interview with Jamie Carragher on Sky Sports, he said: “We will definitely sign some players. Some deals you have to wait until the end. But the end is the important picture, the one we will have on September 1. Because it is true that we are still quite thin.”

It’s not the first time that Iraola has said words to that effect, having echoed similar sentiments during Liverpool‘s pre-season tour in the USA when discussing Liverpool‘s defensive options, and internally the belief at Anfield is that it will be a busy end to the window for Liverpool

On Jones’ move to Inter Milan, Iraola said: “With Curtis, you know. I think it’s still not official but there is an ongoing situation. I understood with Curtis. I talked to him. I think in the first or second training session we talked.

“I value him a lot as a player. He loved this club – it was very clear since the beginning for me – but I understood that probably the outcome was going to be what it has been at the end.

“I’ve never hid it – for me Curtis is a very good player. A very, very good player, but I understood straight away when he talked to me about his situation. It was a situation that could happen and it looks like it is going to happen.”