The News Corp & OpenAI Multi-Year Content Licensing Arrangement
Deal Overview
Basic Facts of the Transaction
Parties
News Corp (licensor & content provider) | OpenAI (licensee & technology partner)
Transaction Size
~$250 million over 5 years (cash payments + OpenAI platform credits)
Deal Structure
Multi-year global licensing agreement; non-exclusive; not structured as equity or acquisition
Announcement Date
22 May 2024
Current Status
Effective and described as a 'tailwind' per News Corp Q2 FY2026 earnings (February 2026); portfolio expanding
Summary
This is not a typical licensing arrangement but an emerging "veracity alliance" in the TMT industry; one that regards premium quality journalistic archives as infrastructure for reliable generative AI. In a context where AI companies have faced multi-billion-dollar lawsuits for unlicensed content scraping (e.g., The New York Times v. OpenAI), News Corp & OpenAI have chosen collaboration over litigation. OpenAI can now rely upon high-quality, real-time, attributable content to improve the fidelity of its products, minimise hallucinations and litigation risk, and earn strong commercial returns.
Moreover, News Corp gains a new, monetised source of returns on its "irreplaceable" human-curated data and positions itself as a trusted adviser for other companies looking to generate revenue from similar assets. The arrangement subtly inverts the conventional power dynamic: legacy media is no longer reactive towards the commercialising effect of AI; it is actively supplying the content that makes commercialisation possible. The "woo-not-sue" model (as CEO Robert Thomson has framed it) has already impacted market expectations, deepening the commoditisation of provenance and reliability as premium offerings of AI products.
Company Details
Technology Partner — OpenAI
Key Facts at Time of Deal:
Founded
December 2015
CEO (at time of deal)
Sam Altman
Market Valuation (May 2024)
~$80–86 billion
OpenAI was founded in December 2015 as a non-profit research organisation, with a mission to ensure "artificial general intelligence serves humanity." By the announcement date, it had evolved into a capped-profit entity, and in October 2025 completed its corporate transformation to a for-profit public benefit corporation. CEO Sam Altman has been at the forefront of the organisation throughout its evolution. At announcement in May 2024, OpenAI's valuation stood at $80–86 billion; it subsequently reached $157 billion (October 2024), $300 billion (April 2025), and $500 billion (secondary share issuance in October 2025), with ongoing fundraising discussions pushing toward $730–850 billion by early 2026.
OpenAI's flagship products: ChatGPT and its family of GPT models are the engines of the most widely adopted consumer and enterprise generative AI products in the world. ChatGPT, launched in November 2022, became the fastest-growing consumer application in history, reaching 100 million users in under two months. It functions as a conversational AI assistant capable of generating text, summarising information, writing code, conducting research, and responding to complex natural-language queries. The underlying GPT-4 and subsequent models are multimodal large language models that process both text and images, powering not only ChatGPT but also a suite of enterprise API products used by thousands of businesses globally.
OpenAI's market leadership derives from several structural advantages: a decisive first-mover advantage in deploying consumer-facing LLMs at scale; deep integration with Microsoft's ecosystem (Azure, Copilot, Bing); and a proprietary training pipeline built on volumes of high-quality data that competitors struggle to replicate. The generative AI landscape is intensely contested: Google (Gemini), Anthropic (Claude), Meta (LLaMA), and Mistral are all meaningful rivals. But OpenAI held an estimated 59% share of the LLM API market as of early 2024, with ChatGPT commanding over 180 million weekly active users. Strategic moves that have most meaningfully accelerated its growth include: the $13 billion Microsoft investment and Azure cloud infrastructure partnership; the launch of the GPT Store and the roll-out of enterprise ChatGPT; and aggressive international expansion across Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.
The Microsoft partnership has been transformative but has not been without regulatory scrutiny. By providing OpenAI with cloud compute at scale and integrating GPT models across the Microsoft product stack, the alliance embedded OpenAI's technology into the global enterprise technology infrastructure. However, in 2024 the UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) opened an AI partnership review examining the Microsoft-OpenAI relationship alongside Google's investment in Anthropic, assessing whether such structural alliances constitute de facto mergers requiring formal notification. The European Commission launched a parallel preliminary inquiry. While no enforcement action has followed, the scrutiny underscores that the regulatory architecture governing AI investment structures remains unsettled.
OpenAI has also faced a sustained wave of copyright litigation. The most consequential suit is The New York Times v. OpenAI & Microsoft (filed December 2023), alleging that millions of Times articles were used without authorisation to train GPT models, potentially entitling the Times to billions in damages and demanding destruction of trained models incorporating its content. Parallel class-action suits have been filed by the Authors Guild and individual authors including John Grisham, Jodi Picoult, and Jonathan Franzen over literary works. Getty Images has pursued infringement claims on both sides of the Atlantic over photographic content. OpenAI's primary defence has been "fair use" — arguing that training on publicly available text constitutes transformative use under US copyright law. The News Corp deal, and the broader voluntary licensing strategy it represents, is OpenAI's strategic response: by proactively securing licences from major rights-holders, it reduces exposure in live litigation and signals to regulators and courts that it takes copyright compliance seriously.
Licensor / Content Provider — News Corp
Key Facts at Time of Deal:
Founded (current entity)
December 2013 (spun out from original News Corporation)
CEO (at time of deal)
Robert Thomson
Market Valuation (May 2024)
~$15.9 billion
News Corp (as it exists today) was spun out in December 2013 from the original News Corporation, to focus exclusively on publishing and media assets, with Fox Corporation (broadcasting and entertainment) separated as the companion entity. CEO Robert Thomson has led the organisation since that point. At announcement for this partnership, News Corp's market value was $15.9 billion (May 2024); by February 2026, it had declined to approximately $13 billion, reflecting sector-wide pressures on traditional media valuations. The organisation owns more than 70 publications around the globe, including: The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, MarketWatch (US); The Times, The Sunday Times, The Sun (UK); and The Australian, news.com.au and various state-based publications (Australia).
The organisation's centres of power are "trusted journalism," "insight and integrity," and unrivalled proprietary data; particularly in the financial vertical. It is known for above-average coverage of breaking news, long-form investigative reporting, and data products (via Dow Jones) that serve institutional financial markets.
News Corp has been a pioneer in digital subscription monetisation. The Wall Street Journal was one of the very first major newspapers to introduce a metered paywall, doing so as far back as 1997; decades before most peers. This set a critical commercial precedent: demonstrating that readers would pay for premium, specialist journalism online at a time when the prevailing industry assumption was that digital content must be free. The Journal's model proved the template that The New York Times (2011) and the Financial Times ultimately adopted at scale. By February 2026, The Wall Street Journal had exceeded 3.7 million digital subscribers, with Dow Jones reporting consistent double-digit digital subscription growth year-on-year. This early-mover advantage entrenched subscriber loyalty and validated News Corp's conviction that brand credibility and editorial quality are genuine competitive moats in the digital era.
Beyond the OpenAI deal, News Corp has moved aggressively to monetise its content across the AI ecosystem. It secured a data licensing arrangement with Bloomberg in early 2026 and is understood to be in discussions with additional major AI platforms. These agreements collectively constitute a new revenue vertical (AI content licensing) that did not exist as a category three years ago. The Wall Street Journal's paywalled archive of financial and business news is particularly valued by AI companies seeking high-quality, domain-specific training data in the financial and business intelligence verticals. The licensing of this archive securely monetises decades of human-curated editorial investment without surrendering editorial independence or brand equity.
The Partnership
Timeline
Public announcement: 22 May 2024.
Effective term: Multi-year global agreement (industry consensus points to five years based on the reported $250 million valuation).
Implementation: Immediate access granted to current and archived content; ongoing integration of display rights and journalistic expertise sharing.
Post-announcement developments: By Q2 FY2026 (February 2026 earnings), News Corp described the partnership as mutually enhancing and confirmed ongoing product enhancements; the company is now expanding its AI licensing portfolio, including a new Bloomberg AI rights agreement in early 2026.
Motivation
For OpenAI: The primary driver was access to premium, real-time, fact-checked content to improve model accuracy, reduce hallucinations, and provide users with attributable, high-quality sources. Sam Altman called it "a proud moment for journalism and technology" and emphasised building a future where "AI deeply respects, enhances, and upholds the standards of world-class journalism."
By May 2024, OpenAI faced an expanding constellation of copyright claims: the Times suit, Author Guild class actions (John Grisham, Jodi Picoult, Jonathan Franzen), Getty Images litigation, and growing regulatory scrutiny under the EU AI Act. In this environment, the News Corp deal serves a dual purpose. Commercially, it delivers premium licensed content that tangibly improves product quality. Legally and regulatorily, it creates an indemnity-like shield against future claims arising from the licensed corpus, signals to regulators in the US (DOJ, FTC), UK (CMA), and EU (European Commission) that voluntary market-driven licensing can resolve training-data concerns without legislation, and reinforces OpenAI's credibility as a responsible AI developer.
The licensed content also materially strengthens ChatGPT's competitive differentiation. First, real-time, verified content from The Wall Street Journal and The Times anchors model outputs to verified reality, directly addressing the hallucination problem that has undermined user trust in AI-generated responses. Second, because the content is licenced, OpenAI can display it in ChatGPT responses with attribution and links back to original sources, a feature unavailable to competitors relying on contested scraped data. Third, the deal builds data infrastructure depth: the multi-decade News Corp archive provides domain expertise in financial markets, geopolitics, law, and international affairs that is structurally difficult to replicate. Smaller AI entrants; without the capital or relationships to negotiate comparable licences, are left relying on lower-quality, legally contested web data. This creates a compounding moat: each licensed deal raises both the quality bar and the legal risk for unlicensed competitors.
For News Corp: The deal diversifies revenue away from volatile advertising (now only ~16% of total revenue) toward stable, high-margin data licensing. Robert Thomson framed it as setting "new standards for veracity, for virtue and for value in the digital age" and the start of "a beautiful friendship." It aligns with the company's "woo rather than sue" (or "woo and sue") strategy, courting responsible AI players commercially while pursuing legal confrontation with those who take without consent.
The contrast with News Corp's position against Perplexity AI is instructive. In late 2024, News Corp and Dow Jones sued Perplexity for allegedly reproducing verbatim excerpts from Wall Street Journal and New York Post articles in AI-generated summaries without licence, payment, or meaningful attribution. The suit alleged copyright infringement and "hot news" misappropriation, a doctrine protecting time-sensitive journalistic scoops from immediate republication by competitors. This litigation defines the outer boundary of News Corp's tolerance: AI platforms that take without asking face costly legal confrontation; those that engage commercially are welcomed as partners.
The OpenAI agreement is therefore both carrot and stick. It rewards responsible AI companies with access to premium content while demonstrating that News Corp has the resources and appetite to pursue infringers. Crucially, the licensing revenue itself provides the financial buffer to sustain expensive litigation against Perplexity and any future infringers, making the AI-forward strategy commercially and legally self-reinforcing. The technology credits that News Corp receives further allow it to insert OpenAI tools directly into its newsrooms and real-estate products, modernising its operations and creating a competitive advantage over publishers still operating without AI assistance.
Integration
The partnership is deliberately symbiotic rather than extractive, a distinction that is fundamental to understanding why this deal was structured as a voluntary licensing arrangement rather than an acquisition, equity investment, or unilateral data extraction. An extractive relationship creates value unilaterally: an AI company trains on news content without permission, capturing the benefit of the journalistic archive while the publisher receives nothing. A symbiotic arrangement, by contrast, creates mutual dependencies and shared incentives. OpenAI needs News Corp's content to improve its products; News Corp needs OpenAI's technology credits and distribution reach to modernise its newsrooms and monetise its archive. Both parties preserve their operational independence while sharing in each other's commercial success.
Under the arrangement, OpenAI may display News Corp content directly in ChatGPT responses, with attribution and links back to original sources, ensuring that both publisher brand and editorial credit are preserved. News Corp shares journalistic expertise to help OpenAI maintain accuracy standards, reinforcing a collaborative editorial relationship rather than a purely transactional data sale. In return, News Corp receives technology credits to integrate OpenAI tools into its editorial workflows, business intelligence services, and digital real-estate platforms, enabling it to embed AI capability across its operations without rebuilding from scratch.
Both parties have publicly emphasised ongoing collaboration rather than one-off data transfer, reflecting a commitment to a long-term, evolving relationship in which each party's contribution deepens over time. News Corp's mastheads: The Wall Street Journal, The Times, The Sun and the rest continue to operate as distinct, editorially independent brands with their own standards, identities, and revenue streams. They are not subsumed into an OpenAI product; rather, they remain sovereign publishers whose content happens to power AI responses. This structural separation is commercially essential: it is precisely the editorial independence and rigour of these mastheads that makes their content valuable as a training and display source in the first place.
Legal Contentions & Regulatory Impact
Legal & Regulatory Issues
No competition authority reviewed the transaction because it is a voluntary licensing agreement, not a merger or acquisition, and therefore falls outside the jurisdictional thresholds that trigger mandatory notification under the EU Merger Regulation, the UK National Security and Investment Act 2021, or the US Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. The transaction involves no change of control, no equity transfer, and no structural consolidation of market power in a form that antitrust regimes are designed to address.
The primary legal dimension is copyright. The deal explicitly bypasses the "fair use" defences that OpenAI and other AI companies have asserted in litigation. Under US copyright law, Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976 codifies the fair use doctrine, permitting limited use of copyrighted material, including for commentary, criticism, education, and transformative purposes, without authorisation. The doctrine is assessed on a four-factor test: (1) the purpose and character of the use (commercial vs. non-commercial; transformative vs. reproductive); (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used; and (4) the effect on the market for the original work.
AI companies have argued that training LLMs on publicly available text constitutes transformative use because the model derives statistical patterns rather than reproducing content verbatim. Publishers counter that: the volume of ingestion and the models' ability to reconstruct near-verbatim text renders the use reproductive; the commercial purpose of AI products undermines any non-commercial fair use claim; and the substitution effect, users relying on AI summaries rather than visiting original sources, directly harms the market for original works. By entering a voluntary licence, OpenAI sidesteps this contested legal terrain entirely. Attribution rights are also contractually guaranteed: the publisher's brand and editorial credit are preserved in every AI-generated response drawing on licensed content, in a manner consistent with authors' moral rights recognised under the Berne Convention in the UK and EU, even where US fair use might theoretically apply.
Data-protection considerations (GDPR, CCPA) are minimal because the content is published news material already in the public domain or behind paywalls with existing consents. However, the global footprint of both parties introduces material cross-jurisdictional complexity. News Corp operates across the US (Copyright Act 1976), UK (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988), and Australia (Copyright Act 1968). The UK's proposed AI and copyright framework (under consultation through 2025) sought to expand permitted text-and-data mining for AI purposes: a provision actively contested by News Corp's UK titles. Australia has no equivalent text-mining exception, making the licenced arrangement essential for Australian content. The EU AI Act (entering force in stages from 2024) imposes transparency obligations on providers of general-purpose AI models, including disclosure of training data used for copyright compliance, obligations that apply to OpenAI's deployment in EU markets. By voluntarily documenting the licensed corpus, OpenAI proactively builds the evidence base for regulatory compliance across all these jurisdictions, giving the deal a risk-management dimension that extends well beyond its commercial value.
Impact on Transaction Value
The legal issues were value-accretive, not blocking. The partnership converts potential legal liability into predictable revenue for News Corp and directly reduces OpenAI's litigation risk and training-data costs. By securing the world's largest premium news archive under a voluntary licence, OpenAI forecloses any future copyright claim from News Corp, removes a significant potential plaintiff from the litigation landscape, and creates a documented compliance posture that is valuable in responding to regulatory enquiries in the US, UK, and EU. There are no public-interest objections; on the contrary, the deal has been welcomed across jurisdictions as a model for responsible AI development, precisely because it demonstrates that private commercial solutions can address training-data issues without the need for statutory intervention.
Deal Implications
The transaction has set a market "price point" for premium news archives and normalised paid licensing as the responsible path for AI companies. It reinforces the trend established by OpenAI's deals with the Associated Press, Axel Springer, and the Financial Times, and has been directly benchmarked against by subsequent licensors and licensees in the sector.
Enforcement trends across the key jurisdictions, the DOJ and FTC in the US, the CMA and ICO in the UK, and the European Commission under both the GDPR framework and the emerging AI Act enforcement regime, broadly favour private commercial solutions over protracted litigation for now. Regulators appear content to let market-driven licensing address training-data issues, though calls for statutory remuneration schemes (analogous to the EU's press publishers' right under Article 15 of the Copyright in the Digital Single Market Directive) are intensifying. This deal, and the cluster of similar arrangements it has catalysed, provides the market with evidence that commercial licensing is functional and scalable — which may delay but is unlikely to prevent eventual legislative intervention.
Industry Impact (TMT)
This partnership accelerates the TMT industry's structural shift from the "attention economy" (selling eyeballs via advertising) to the "intelligence economy" (selling verified data as AI fuel).
Macro view: 2024–2026 marks the moment when legacy media realised that its archives are the "rare-earth elements" of generative AI. The deal is a trailblazer for "Journalism-as-a-Service" where publishers become upstream data suppliers rather than downstream distributors. Commercially, the deal has pioneered the monetisation of provenance: by requiring clear attribution and direct links back to original articles, OpenAI's responses protect the publisher's brand while creating new, recurring royalty streams.
Operationally: The deal is forcing the entire industry to accelerate AI adoption inside newsrooms; publishers without similar arrangements risk falling behind both in revenue and in technological capability. The integration of OpenAI tools directly into News Corp's editorial and real-estate workflows demonstrates a practical model for AI-enhanced journalism that is likely to become a baseline expectation, not a differentiator, within the next three years.
Structurally: The deal is dividing the sector into clear camps: premium publishers aligned with OpenAI and Microsoft (News Corp, Dow Jones, FT, AP, Axel Springer); hardline litigators pursuing regulatory confrontation (The New York Times, major photography agencies); and a long tail of smaller publishers accepting lower-value arrangements or no arrangement at all. Winners will be publishers with strong premium brands and deep specialist archives. Losers will be digital-native publishers without the scale, brand prestige, or content depth to command comparable terms. The deal solidifies the role of "human-verified" content as the premium layer in an AI-dominated information ecosystem, and cements News Corp's position as one of its principal architects.
House View
The partnership has quietly normalised a new reality: private contracts are now doing the work that public law has yet to figure out. By writing their own rules around consent, attribution, and payment, News Corp and OpenAI have sidestepped the paralysis of copyright litigation and created a workable model for responsible data use. This contractual ingenuity is impressive; but it also shifts power away from legislatures and courts toward the negotiating table, where only the strongest players can sit. The current copyright frameworks: the US Copyright Act 1976, the UK CDPA 1988, and the nascent EU AI Act, were not designed with large-scale AI training in mind, and their application to LLMs remains a live interpretive question in multiple jurisdictions. Legislative reform is coming; the question is whether it will codify the deal-based model that News Corp and OpenAI have pioneered, or impose a more prescriptive statutory licensing regime that constrains commercial flexibility.
For News Corp, the deeper test is cultural rather than commercial. Licensing revenue is welcome, but the real danger lies in subtle drift: if AI responses become the primary way readers encounter journalism, the incentive could tilt toward content that "performs" well in summaries rather than content that challenges or unsettles. The company's next phase will be defined by whether it can protect the contrarian, investigative edge that made its archives valuable in the first place, even as commercial logic pulls toward safer, more AI-friendly formats.
Looking forward, News Corp's emerging risks include: dependency concentration (a significant portion of its new AI licensing revenue derives from a single counterparty); the possibility that OpenAI's market position erodes if a competitor achieves comparable quality through alternative training approaches; and regulatory risk in the UK and EU, where proposed text-and-data mining exceptions could, if enacted broadly, reduce publishers' leverage to demand payment. Mitigation strategies include active portfolio diversification (the Bloomberg deal being the first step), engagement with legislators to shape the emerging AI copyright framework, and continued investment in the editorial quality that makes its archive commercially irreplaceable.
The industry is watching closely. If this model scales, it could entrench a two-tier ecosystem: a handful of well-resourced publishers able to negotiate favourable terms, and everyone else left to hope for trickle-down access or regulatory rescue. News Corp's early success may therefore become a litmus test, not just for its own adaptability, but for whether legacy media can evolve into a co-shaper of the intelligence age without losing the soul of the craft.
In the end, this deal may prove less about money and more about legitimacy. By choosing to feed the machine rather than fight it, News Corp has staked a claim as one of the first institutions to treat AI not as an existential threat, but as a new distribution channel that still requires human judgment at its core.
Securitisation: Monetising Tomorrow's Royalties Today
The real commercial opportunity emerges when these predictable cash flows are pooled and securitised for the capital markets. As of Q2 FY2026, News Corp has confirmed that its AI licensing portfolio, anchored by the OpenAI deal, is generating material incremental revenue, described on its earnings call as a clear "tailwind." While specific per-contract figures have not been publicly disclosed, analyst estimates suggest the OpenAI arrangement alone contributes in the range of $40–50 million annually once fully ramped across its five-year term. News Corp is actively expanding this portfolio: the Bloomberg data deal in early 2026 represents the first diversification, and management commentary indicates further negotiations are underway. Looking ahead to 2027–2028, if News Corp can aggregate licensing agreements with three to five major AI platforms, the resulting cash flow profile, diversified by counterparty, long-dated, and index-linked, would satisfy the structuring requirements for a rated ABS issuance.
News Corp's AI licensing revenues (now a high-margin, multi-counterparty annuity) closely resemble the music royalties that have been securitised for decades, from Bowie Bonds in 1997 to the Hipgnosis-style ABS structures of the 2020s. Fitch Ratings noted in October 2025 that AI is already reshaping music IP ABS cash-flow modelling, and the same structural logic applies directly to news. By ring-fencing the OpenAI (and future) licensing payments into a special purpose vehicle (SPV), News Corp could issue royalty-backed notes or "Data Yield Bonds" to institutional investors seeking alternative yield. The underlying collateral is not volatile advertising revenue but contractually committed, inflation-linked payments from the world's leading AI platforms; a compelling credit profile.
Emerging in parallel is a nascent usage-based licensing model, in which publishers are compensated per query or per citation rather than through a flat annual fee. Microsoft's Publisher Content Marketplace and Amazon's reported AI content exchange represent early marketplace infrastructure for this approach, platforms enabling AI companies to licence content dynamically, paying only when they actually retrieve and deploy it. This shift matters for securitisation: usage-based revenues are variable rather than contractually committed, making them harder to tranche and rate than fixed-fee annuities. However, as the market matures and usage data becomes more transparent, minimum-usage guarantees, analogous to minimum guarantees in music streaming licences, are likely to become standard, converting variable streams into securitisable fixed income. Investment banks have begun modelling "AI royalty" as a discrete asset class, with early estimates projecting a potential market of $2–5 billion in rated notes by 2028 if the licensing market continues to expand at its current pace.
This is where the revolution truly lands: yesterday's headlines are quietly turning into tomorrow's fixed-income proxy. A publisher that once fought tooth and nail for crumbs of advertising revenue is now creating an entirely new asset class that pension funds, insurance companies, and sovereign wealth funds can buy, tranche, and trade. In LLM terms, it transforms the "raw material" of trustworthy journalism into the "sovereign data infrastructure" of the intelligence age.
Final Reference List
News Corp & OpenAI Joint Press Release (May 22, 2024) — investors.newscorp.com
OpenAI Announcement (May 22, 2024) — openai.com
Wall Street Journal: "OpenAI, WSJ Owner News Corp Strike Content Deal Valued at Over $250 Million" (May 22, 2024) — wsj.com
News Corp Q2 FY2026 Earnings Release & Call Transcript (Feb 5, 2026) — newscorp.com/earnings
Reuters: OpenAI Valuation Coverage (2024–2025) — reuters.com
The Information: OpenAI Secondary Sales and Valuations (2024–2025) — theinformation.com
Visual Capitalist: "The Journey to OpenAI's Staggering $500B Valuation" (Oct 3, 2025) — visualcapitalist.com
Sacra: OpenAI Valuation & Funding (Ongoing) — sacra.com
Yahoo Finance / CompaniesMarketCap: Market Cap Data for News Corp — finance.yahoo.com
Disney-OpenAI Sora Deal: Joint Release (Dec 11, 2025) — thewaltdisneycompany.com
Bloomberg: Walt Disney Corporation Sora Deal Warrants (Dec 2025) — bloomberg.com
Digiday: Trends in Usage-Based Deals & Marketplaces (Jul 2025) — digiday.com
eMarketer: "Usage-based deals could reshape AI content monetization models" (Aug 20, 2025) — emarketer.com
The Information: "News Publishers Shift AI Licensing Focus to Usage-Based Deals" (Aug 19, 2025) — theinformation.com
