settles

Universal Music Group said Wednesday it has reached licensing agreements with artificial intelligence music startup Udio, settling a lawsuit that had accused Udio of using copyrighted music to train its AI.

Users create music using Udio’s AI, which can compose original songs — including voices and instruments — from text prompts.

Udio has agreed with UMG to launch a new platform next year that is only trained on “authorized and licensed music,” and will let users customize, stream and share music.

“These new agreements with Udio demonstrate our commitment to do what’s right by our artists and songwriters, whether that means embracing new technologies, developing new business models, diversifying revenue streams or beyond,” Lucian Grainge, UMG’s chairman and chief executive, said in a statement.

Udio declined to disclose the financial terms of the settlement and licensing agreements. UMG did not immediately return a request for comment on the terms.

Artificial intelligence has brought new opportunities as well as challenges to the entertainment industry, as AI startups have been training their models on information on the internet, which entertainment companies say infringes on their copyrighted work.

In the music industry, music businesses have accused New York City-based Udio and other AI music startups of training on copyrighted music to generate new songs that are based on popular hits without compensation or permission.

UMG, Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group and other music businesses sued Udio last year. In the lawsuit, Udio was accused of using hits like The Temptations’ “My Girl,” to create a similar melody called “Sunshine Melody.” UMG owns the copyright to “My Girl.”

“A comparison of one section of the Udio-generated file and ‘My Girl’ reflects a number of similarities, including a very similar melody, the same chords, and very similar backing vocals,” according to the lawsuit. “These similarities are further reflected in the side-by-side transcriptions of the musical scores for the Udio file and the original recording.”

Udio said on its website at the time that it stands by its technology and that its AI model learns from examples, similar to how students listen to music and study scores.

“The goal of model training is to develop an understanding of musical ideas — the basic building blocks of musical expression that are owned by no one,” Udio had said in a statement. “We are completely uninterested in reproducing content in our training set.”

On Wednesday, Udio’s CEO and co-founder, Andrew Sanchez, said he was thrilled at the opportunity to work with UMG “to redefine how AI empowers artists and fans.”

The collaboration is the first music licensing agreement that Udio has reached with a major music label.

“This moment brings to life everything we’ve been building toward — uniting AI and the music industry in a way that truly champions artists,” Sanchez said in a statement. “Together, we’re building the technological and business landscape that will fundamentally expand what’s possible in music creation and engagement.”

Udio said that artists can opt in to the new platform and will be compensated, but declined to go into the specifics or the artists involved.

Udio, launched in 2024, was co-founded by former Google DeepMind employees. Udio’s backers include music artist will.i.am, Instagram co-founder and Anthropic’s chief product officer Mike Krieger and venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.

Udio said millions of people have used Udio since it launched in 2024. Users can access the platform through its app or website. The company did not break out specifically how many downloads or website users it has.

Udio has had 128,000 app downloads in Apple’s App Store since its app was released in May, according to estimates from New York-based mobile analytics firm Appfigures.

On Thursday, UMG also announced a partnership with London-based Stability AI to develop music creation tools powered by AI for artists, producers and songwriters.

Sept. 29 (UPI) — YouTube has agreed to pay $24.5 million, toward the construction of a new White House ballroom, to settle a lawsuit by President Donald Trump for suspending his channel in 2021 following the Jan. 6, riots.

The online video platform, owned by Alphabet, will pay $22 million from the settlement to the nonprofit Trust for the National Mall, which is “dedicated to restoring, preserving and elevating the National Mall, to support the construction of the White House State Ballroom,” according to court documents. The ballroom is estimated to cost $200 million, according to the White House.

The other $2.5 million from YouTube’s settlement will go to other plaintiffs, including the nonprofit American Conservative Union.

YouTube is the third tech platform to settle with Trump, who also settled with Meta and Twitter for banning his accounts in 2021. Trump settled with Meta for $25 million and with Twitter, renamed X, for $10 million.

All three platforms claimed Trump’s posts after the U.S. Capitol riots risked inciting further violence. Trump said the suspensions amounted to censorship. All of his accounts were reinstated after tech leaders took a more supportive stance, with Elon Musk of X, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg and Alphabet chief executive officer Sundar Pichai attending Trump’s inauguration in January.

Trump also has received settlements from media outlets, including CBS and ABC News. ABC and Disney settled with the president for $15 million toward his future presidential library after he accused the network and anchor George Stephanopoulous of defamation. And Paramount Global paid out $16 million for CBS’ editing of a Kamala Harris interview on “60 Minutes.”

Last week, YouTube said it would reinstate a number of banned accounts, which had violated the channel’s now defunct rules about posting misinformation about COVID-19 and the 2020 election.

YouTube “values conservative voices on its platform and recognizes that these creators have extensive reach and play an important role in civic discourse,” the platform said.

Callum Makin had to settle for a bronze medal at the World Boxing Championships after a semi-final defeat in the men’s 75kg division.

The 21-year-old middleweight was beaten by Rami Kiwan at the M&S Arena in Liverpool on Friday – the judge scoring all five rounds to his Bulgarian opponent.

Makin’s fellow Liverpudlian Odel Kamara is one of five other British fighters already guaranteed bronze before their semi-finals at the weekend.

Kamara faces Torekhan Sabyrkhan of Kazakhstan on Saturday in the men’s 70kg semi-final after his win over Mongolia’s Byamba-Erdene Otgonbaatar.

Teagn Stott is through to the semi-finals in the men’s 85kg following a second-round stoppage against Semion Boldirev of Bulgaria and will now take on Ukrainian Danylo Zhasan.

Elsewhere, Chantelle Reid will square up against Natalya Bogdanova in the semi-finals of the women’s 70kg after beating Mengge Zhang.

Emily Asquith beat Turkey’s Elif Guneri in the women’s 80kg to secure a last-four meeting with India’s Pooja Rani.

Attorneys for a documentary filmmaker who sued the city of Los Angeles for excessive police force said Wednesday that they had reached a settlement over claims their client was assaulted by an LAPD officer at a 2021 protest.

The settlement came abruptly after the first day of the civil trial, when the plaintiff, Vishal Singh, was accosted by a man, with his phone out recording, as Singh walked out of the federal courthouse downtown. Christian Contreras, an attorney for Singh, identified the man who confronted his client as Tomas Morales, a prominent alt-right livestreamer.

Proceedings had just wrapped up for the day Tuesday when Morales approached Singh, Contreras and others as they walked out of the glass-paneled building at 1st and Hill streets, according to video posted on social media.

Morales posted a clip on his Instagram account in which he can be heard demanding to know whether Singh still wants to “burn LAPD to the ground” and asking whether he is a member of “antifa.” The barrage of questions continued as the group walked up Hill away from the courthouse, the video shows.

Morales didn’t immediately respond to a message sent Wednesday to his account on X.

Contreras said Singh was so shaken by the encounter that his attorneys pushed the judge to declare a mistrial on the grounds that Morales was trying to intimidate a party to the case. After the judge declined to grant their motion, the two sides agreed to settle for an unspecified amount of money, Contreras said.

Larger settlements require a final sign-off from the City Council.

Even if the case ended in an “anticlimactic” fashion, Contreras said that “there has been some accountability” since jurors saw videos of Los Angeles Police Department officers using excessive force against Singh and others.

“He was looking forward to taking this case to a full resolution at trial, and this issue came up,” Contreras said. “It’s unsettling, but he just wants to move forward in his life.”

Singh said in the lawsuit and interviews with The Times that Singh was standing in the middle of Coronado Street outside a Koreatown establishment called Wi Spa, filming a confrontation between left-wing and far-right groups. Bystander video showed Singh rapidly walking backward as instructed by police and filming with a phone from behind a parked car when an officer leaned over and swung his baton at Singh like it was a “baseball bat.” The impact fractured a joint in Singh’s right hand and two of Singh’s fingers, the lawsuit said.

The officer, John Jenal, argued in court documents that he did not perceive the object in Singh’s raised and outstretched hand to be a phone, and that he saw Singh as an immediate threat.

“I’m relieved that there’s both compensation and validation for what Vishal has experienced through this settlement,” said Adam Rose of the Los Angeles Press Club, adding in a text message that Singh has been a “figurative and literal punching bag for far-right extremists for years.”

In one instance, the online harassment threats got so bad that Singh was forced to bow out of a speaking appearance at the Asian American Journalism Assn.’s annual conference, Rose said.

“It shows that there is this prevailing threat toward journalists of all types, but in particular it can happen to independent journalists,” he said.

The settlement comes as a federal judge is expected to make a ruling in two lawsuits brought by press advocates against the LAPD and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for the treatment of journalists covering the recent pro-immigration protests.

Artificial intelligence startup Anthropic has settled a class action copyright infringement lawsuit, in which authors accused the company of training its AI models on their work without permission, according to a Tuesday court filing.

San Francisco-based Anthropic, which trained its AI assistant Claude using copyrighted books, was sued by authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber and Kirk Wallace in August 2024.

Terms of the settlement were not disclosed. The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Last June, U.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled that AI models could legally learn from copyrighted books without the authors’ consent. The decision was a partial win for Anthropic.

Alsup found the usage to be “exceedingly transformative” and “a fair use,” though the company might have broken the law by pirating a large portion of its source material. According to the filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, the tech company and the involved authors asked the court to pause its proceedings while they finalize the settlement deal.

“Fair use” doctrine, which allows for the limited reproduction of copyrighted material without consent in some circumstances, is a key component of AI companies’ defenses against copyright claims.

Alsup originally ordered the matter to go to trial in December to decide how much they would pay in piracy damages. If it went to trial, the damages could have reached up to $150,000 per case of willful copyright infringement and could have cost the startup billions. In early August, the AI company attempted to get an appeal and was denied.

Anthropic, founded by former OpenAI employees and backed by Amazon, pirated at least 7 million books from Books3, Library Genesis and Pirate Library Mirror, online libraries containing unauthorized copies of copyrighted books, to train its software, according to the judge.

They also bought millions of print copies in bulk and stripped the books’ bindings, cut their pages and scanned them into digital and machine-readable forms, which Alsup found to be in the bounds of fair use, according to the judge’s ruling.

“The mere conversion of a print book to a digital file to save space and enable searchability was transformative for that reason alone,” he wrote.

Anthropic later purchased the books it initially pirated. Alsup said the purchases did not absolve the company, but that they could reduce damages.

This agreement is being reached as many other copyright cases against AI companies are being brought to courts around the country. Most recently, Walt Disney Co. and Universal Pictures sued artificial intelligence company Midjourney, which the studios allege trained its image generation models on their copyrighted materials.

Actress Gina Carano, Lucasfilm and its parent company Walt Disney Co. have settled the federal lawsuit filed in which Carano claimed that, in 2021, she was wrongfully terminated from her role in “The Mandalorian” after she expressed her conservative political views on social media.

The settlement details have not been made public, but Lucasfilm released a statement praising Carano’s on-set professionalism and expressing the hope of “identifying opportunities to work together with Ms. Carano in the near future.”

I am here to beg everyone to remain calm and avoid using the four Cs: cancel culture (is this the end of it?) and corporate capitulation (is this another example of it?)

No and no.

Cancel culture has long been an amorphous and often recklessly applied term, used to describe a litany of events, including but certainly not limited to male predators losing their jobs, students protesting their school’s choice of graduation speakers and outrage over J.K. Rowling’s stance on transgender women.

Recently, however, it has taken a far more concrete shape that looks astonishingly like the White House where President Trump continues to literally cancel all manner of things, including U.S. membership in the World Health Organization, the regulatory power of the Environmental Protection Agency and huge portions of Medicaid. Recently, he fired the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics after the bureau documented weaker than expected numbers for July and downward revisions for the previous two months.

Corporate capitulation, too, is alive and well, with law firms, universities and media companies falling like dominoes before Trump’s lawsuits and threats of defunding. Last year, Trump sued ABC and its parent company Disney for defamation after anchor George Stephanopoulos wrongly stated on air that Trump had been found civilly liable for raping E. Jean Carroll — Trump had been found civilly liable of sexually assaulting and defaming Carroll. Disney settled for $15 million, paid to Trump’s presidential foundation and museum.

Even more troubling was Paramount Global’s decision to pay a $16-million settlement in what many consider a frivolous lawsuit brought by Trump against “60 Minutes.” After late-night host Stephen Colbert called the move a “big fat bribe” designed to ensure Paramount’s recent acquisition by Skydance, CBS, which is owned by Paramount, announced that “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” was being canceled due to financial considerations.

So while it is tempting to see Disney settling with Carano as a piece of a larger and very worrisome whole, particularly when Elon Musk financed her lawsuit, it was in fact simply the right thing to do.

Carano is a former mixed martial artist turned actor who has been vocal about her support for conservative causes and President Trump. In 2020, she had caught some flack for posting “beep/bop/boop” as her pronouns in her Twitter bio, which some took as her way of mocking trans people. She denied this, changed her bio and expressed support for the trans community.

There were also posts that criticized masking policies and shutdowns during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as one calling for an investigation into voter fraud after the 2020 election.

But it was a repost on Instagram that cost her her job — in February 2021, she reposted a famously horrific image of a half-naked Jewish woman fleeing from a mob with a moronically simplistic message about divisive politics: “Most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews. How is that any different from hating someone for their political views?”

Landing just a month after then-President Trump sent an armed mob to attack the Capitol in the hopes of overturning an election he refused to believe he had lost, the post, which appeared to compare MAGA supporters in 2021 America with Jews in Nazi Germany, sparked #FireGinaCarano.

And that’s exactly what Disney did. Calling her posts “abhorrent and unacceptable,” Lucasfilm excised her character from “The Mandalorian” and canceled an upcoming spinoff in which she was to star. Her talent agency, UTA, dropped her and Hasbro canceled a line of toys based on her “Mandalorian” character.

It was an overreaction that smacked of fear and pandering. I do not agree with the sentiments Carano expressed in her posts, but compared with the blithely toxic abuse regularly used on social media, they are relatively benign, based far more on genuine ignorance — most people are in fact aware of the vicious antisemitism leveraged by the Nazis as well as their institutionalized tactics of fear — than anything else.

Of course, those who attempt to be politically provocative on social media (and reposting a photo of a victimized Jewish woman in such context is the definition of political provocation) cannot then feign shock and dismay when people are provoked, especially at a time when far-right tweets, including the president’s, had led to a violent attack against lawmakers. (Hence the irony of Musk’s support — the platform he renamed X was in large part built on its ability to harness all manner of just and unjust hashtag campaigns.)

But as my colleague Robin Abcarian noted when Carano filed her lawsuit in 2023, the social media mob’s decision that a woman, who was far from a household name, deserved to lose her livelihood, and more important, Lucasfilm’s agreement with that decision, was extreme.

Bad publicity is never good for an entertainment property and whether it was explicit in her contract or not, Carano did represent, to a certain extent, “The Mandalorian,” Lucasfilm and Disney. Unfortunately, the entertainment industry’s increasing reliance on social media has created a world in which actors and other creative types are expected to amass millions of followers on platforms that tend to reward the outspoken and outrageous over the thoughtful. Encouraged to reveal themselves “authentically,” stars can find themselves prodded by fans to comment on current events and excoriated when they refuse or respond in a way that certain followers consider insincere or politically incorrect.

Telling people to stay off social media is not the answer; neither is regulation by hashtag campaign.

While Carano’s case is certainly reflective of many perils that face us at the moment, the fact that she reached a settlement, including an apparent promise of more work, is not a sign of further deterioration.

The fear that our cultural landscape is being attacked by political forces that would strangle the notion of free speech and competing ideologies is real and justified. But in this case, the capitulation came not when Disney and Lucasfilm decided to settle with Carano, but when they fired her in the first place.

Welcome to Screen Gab, the newsletter for everyone who likes a dramatic comeback.

Remember when Heidi Klum drilled into our reality TV heads that, in fashion, one day you’re in, and the next day you’re out? Well, even she knows the past can come back in style. After a 16-season run on “Project Runway” as host and judge, Klum departed the fashion competition series in 2018 and, along with the show’s original mentor Tim Gunn, went on to create “Making the Cut,” their version of a fashion tournament for Prime Video that ran for three seasons. (Model Karlie Kloss assumed Klum’s “Project Runway” duties in subsequent seasons.) Now, as “Project Runway” launches its 21st season, moving homes yet again (to Freeform from Bravo), Klum brings the nostalgia factor to the show’s revamping, which includes the addition of super stylist Law Roach to the judges panel. Roach stopped by Guest Spot to discuss joining the ranks of the long-running reality competition.

Also in this week’s Screen Gab, our streaming recommendations include an illuminating documentary that explains how “The Ed Sullivan Show” amplified Black music and culture, and a collection of ‘90s films that defined an era through their soundtracks.

ICYMI

Must-read stories you might have missed

Luis Guzmán, Jenna Ortega and Catherine Zeta-Jones, photographed in London this month, return for the second season of Netflix’s “Wednesday.”

(Jennifer McCord / For The Times)

For Jenna Ortega, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Luis Guzmán, ‘Wednesday’ proves ‘weird is beautiful’: The actors return for Season 2 of Netflix’s hit YA series, which brings Gomez and Morticia Addams into focus.

‘Chief of War’ centers Hawaiian history and a warrior’s story: Co-creator Jason Momoa stars as the late 18th century warrior Ka’iana in a story set at the intersection of the Hawaiian island kingdoms and the arrival of European colonists.

Go behind the scenes with the ‘Alien: Earth’ cast at Comic-Con 2025: Watch our exclusive follow-along with the cast of FX’s “Alien: Earth” cast at San Diego Comic-Con as they sign autographs, visit the show’s immersive activation and more.

As AI changes how movies are made, Hollywood crews ask: What’s left for us?: AI is supplying powerful new tools at a fraction of the cost, forcing below-the-line artists to wonder if the future of filmmaking has a place for them.

Turn on

Recommendations from the film and TV experts at The Times

Ed Sullivan with the Jackson 5 and Diana Ross.

(Netflix)

“Sunday Best: The Untold Story of Ed Sullivan” (Netflix)

Ed Sullivan was so famous, such an institution in his time, that his name became the text of a number in the musical “Bye Bye, Birdie.” It’s been half a century since “The Ed Sullivan Show” ended its 24-season run, but Sullivan, who gave Elvis Presley a platform and introduced the Beatles to America, will be seen as long as they continue to matter, which is to say, forever. The “Untold” in Sacha Jenkins’ affecting documentary is the show’s history with the many Black artists it presented to an audience of many millions, through years in which television networks bowed to the bigotry of what it called the Southern audience. Yet even had you taken Black acts on “Sullivan” for granted, the extent of the host’s progressivism might come as surprise. Those sharing memories include the late Harry Belafonte, Smokey Robinson and the Temptations’ Otis Williams; seen in performance are Stevie Wonder, Jackie Wilson, Bo Diddley, James Brown, Nina Simone, Mahalia Jackson and the Jackson 5, in all their youthful glory. — Robert Lloyd

Guided by the words of an ancient samurai text, Ghost Dog (Forest Whitaker) is a professional killer able to dissolve into the night and move through the city unnoticed in “Ghost Dog: The Way Of The Samurai.”

(Ghost Dog / Artisan Entertainment)

’90s Soundtrack Movies (Criterion Channel)

Now they exist as relics: banged-up soundtrack cassettes that slid around in the passenger side of everyone’s cars. But we all listened to them and in many cases, they ended up being more memorable than the films themselves. A lot of good was done when acts like U2, Talking Heads, Depeche Mode and Nick Cave lent their drawing power to director Wim Wenders’ mystifying 1991 sci-fi art thinker “Until the End of the World.” The songs were an adventure (though I couldn’t quote you a single line from the script). More substantially, Jim Jarmusch introduced his fan base to Wu-Tang Clan’s RZA, who contributed a superb head-bobbing soundtrack to 1999’s “Ghost Dog: The Way of the Samurai,” proving there was plenty of crossover between Soho and Shaolin. David Lynch, always plugged in musically, drew from David Bowie’s underrated “Outside” album for the white-line opening credits of 1997’s “Lost Highway.” And even when Bowie wasn’t game — as with the bio-in-all-but-name “Velvet Goldmine” — an inventive glam-saturated soundtrack could carry the day. Criterion’s new series is programming you can play in the background and still enjoy. — Joshua Rothkopf

Guest spot

A weekly chat with actors, writers, directors and more about what they’re working on — and what they’re watching

“Project Runway” adds Hollywood stylist Law Roach to its judges panel.

(Rankin / Disney)

As one of Hollywood’s biggest stylists and image architects, Law Roach has bolstered the fashion profile of stars like Zendaya, Hunter Schafer and Anya Taylor-Joy and set the tone for every red carpet he’s touched with his viral styling choices. Now, he’s bringing his unparalleled fashion sense to the judge’s panel of “Project Runway.” The new season premiered Thursday on Freeform with two episodes; it will air weekly and also stream on Hulu and Disney+. Roach stopped by Screen Gab to discuss his feelings on constructive criticism, the fictional character he’d like to style and what he’s watching. — Yvonne Villarreal

As a creative in the fashion world, is “Project Runway” a show you watched at any point over its run? What value did you see in it and how do you hope your involvement elevates the show?

Yes, I watched it religiously, of course. The season that Christian won is hands down still my favorite. I think it gave me an inside look at an industry that I was craving to be a part of. I think my real-world experience and passion will come through not only to the viewers but also to the contestants.

You bring a bold and direct feedback style to the judges panel from the start. How do you prefer to receive feedback on your work and when do you trust it?

Criticism is a part of every job. I think it is important to hear it and if it fits you or can help you grow, take it in, and learn from it, but if it doesn’t, ignore it.

As a stylist and image architect, which fictional character of TV or film — past or present — would you most like to create a fashion profile for?

Jessica Rabbit because we only got to see her in one look!

What’s your go-to “comfort watch,” the film or TV show you return to again and again?

“Top Chef” [Peacock] or any cooking competition show. I love food and witnessing the thought that goes into making the food.

Current and former Facebook leadership reached the agreement with shareholders only one day into the trial.

Mark Zuckerberg and current and former directors and officers of Meta Platforms have agreed to settle claims seeking $8bn for the damage they allegedly caused the company by allowing repeated violations of Facebook users’ privacy.

Zuckerberg and his counterparts reached the agreement on Thursday with shareholders who brought the lawsuit.

The parties did not disclose details of the settlement, and defence lawyers did not address the judge, Kathaleen McCormick of the Delaware Court of Chancery. McCormick adjourned the trial just as it was to enter its second day, and she congratulated the parties.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Sam Closic, said the agreement just came together quickly.

Billionaire venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, who is a defendant in the trial and a Meta director, was scheduled to testify on Thursday.

Shareholders of Meta sued Zuckerberg, Andreessen and other former company officials, including former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg, in hopes of holding them liable for billions of dollars in fines and legal costs the company paid in recent years.

The Federal Trade Commission fined Facebook $5bn in 2019 after finding that it failed to comply with a 2012 agreement with the regulator to protect users’ data.

The shareholders wanted the 11 defendants to use their personal wealth to reimburse the company. The defendants denied the allegations, which they called “extreme claims”. Facebook changed its name to Meta in 2021. The company was not a defendant.

The company declined to comment. A lawyer for the defendants did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“This settlement may bring relief to the parties involved, but it’s a missed opportunity for public accountability,” said Jason Kint, the head of Digital Content Next, a trade group for content providers.

Zuckerberg was expected to take the stand on Monday and Sandberg on Wednesday. The trial was scheduled to run through the end of next week.

The case was also expected to include testimony from former Facebook board members Peter Thiel, Palantir Technologies co-founder, and Reed Hastings, co-founder of Netflix.

Longstanding concerns

Meta investors alleged in the lawsuit that former and current board members completely failed to oversee the company’s compliance with the 2012 FTC agreement and claim that Zuckerberg and Sandberg knowingly ran Facebook as an illegal data harvesting operation.

The case followed revelations that data from millions of Facebook users was accessed by Cambridge Analytica, a now-defunct political consulting firm that worked for Donald Trump’s successful US presidential campaign in 2016. Those revelations led to the FTC fine, which was a record at the time.

On Wednesday, an expert witness for the plaintiffs testified about what he called “gaps and weaknesses” in Facebook’s privacy policies, but would not say if the company violated the 2012 agreement that Facebook reached with the FTC.

Jeffrey Zients, a former board member, testified on Wednesday that the company did not agree to the FTC fine to spare Zuckerberg legal liability, as shareholders allege.

On its website, the company has said it has invested billions of dollars into protecting user privacy since 2019.

The trial would have been a rare opportunity for Meta investors to see Zuckerberg answer probing questions under oath. In 2017, Zuckerberg was expected to testify at a trial involving a lawsuit by company investors opposed to his plan to issue a special class of Facebook stock that would have extended his control over that company. That case also settled before he took the stand.

“Facebook has successfully remade the ‘Cambridge Analytica’ scandal about a few bad actors rather than an unraveling of its entire business model of surveillance capitalism and the reciprocal, unbridled sharing of personal data,” Kint said. “That reckoning is now left unresolved.”

Meta stock was down 0.4 percent for the day as of 11am in New York (15:00 GMT) and 3.1 percent over the last five days.