Paramount Skydance wanted to own Warner Bros. Discovery by September, but the $110 billion transaction is now frozen while 12 states and the Writers Guild of America pursue Clayton Act cases that could decide who controls a substantial piece of Hollywood. Instead of closing the deal, Paramount may spend much of the next ten months paying for the privilege of waiting.

Paramount, Warner Bros. Discovery, a coalition of 12 state attorneys general and the Writers Guild of America have agreed that the proposed acquisition cannot close until five days after the court rules on the merits of the antitrust cases or June 1, 2027, whichever comes first.

The agreement also prohibits Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery from taking steps to integrate or consolidate their operations. The companies therefore remain separate, and the planned combination of Paramount Pictures, Warner Bros., CBS, CNN, HBO, Showtime, Paramount+, HBO Max and dozens of cable networks has been placed in legal cold storage. 

The deal values Warner Bros. Discovery at approximately $81 billion in equity and $110 billion including debt, with Paramount agreeing to pay $31 per share in cash. It would be one of the largest media transactions ever completed, assuming it ever gets completed.

This stopped being a conventional merger review some time ago. It has become an expensive courtroom battle involving federal regulators, Democratic state attorneys general, Hollywood labor groups, international competition authorities and enough political baggage to fill several private jets.

The August Hearing Is Gone

The new agreement replaces the shorter temporary restraining order issued on July 20 by U.S. District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín of the Northern District of California.

The cases are The State of California et al. v. Paramount Skydance Corp. et al., Case No. 4:26-cv-07116-AMO, and Writers Guild of America, West, Inc. et al. v. Paramount Skydance Corp. et al., Case No. 4:26-cv-07212-AMO.

The judge had originally scheduled an August 3 hearing to determine whether the merger should remain blocked under a preliminary injunction. That hearing and its associated briefing deadlines have now been canceled. The WGA has withdrawn its preliminary injunction motion, although both the states and the guild may renew those requests later if necessary. 

The parties must submit proposed trial schedules by July 31. No trial date has been established.

Paramount is calling this a victory because it removes the immediate preliminary injunction fight and creates a more direct path to a full trial. California Attorney General Rob Bonta and New York Attorney General Letitia James are also calling it a victory because Paramount cannot complete the transaction while their cases proceed.

Both sides are declaring victory, because nothing says “we won” quite like Paramount preparing to burn through roughly $7 million per day while everyone waits for a judge to decide whether the deal survives.

What the Judge Found

The July 20 ruling was not a final determination that the merger violates antitrust law. Judge Martínez-Olguín did, however, find that the states had presented enough evidence to justify stopping the companies from closing while the court considered the larger case.

The states identified three markets that they claim would be harmed:

1. Distribution of wide release theatrical films
2. Distribution of anticipated top grossing theatrical films
3. Licensing of basic cable channels to distributors

For the temporary order, the judge focused primarily on wide release theatrical distribution.

According to the states’ evidence, Paramount and Warner Bros. would hold an estimated 27 percent share of that market. The proposed combination would also increase the Herfindahl Hirschman Index, a standard measure of market concentration, by approximately 359 points to 2,074.

The court found that those figures created a substantial enough presumption of reduced competition to justify maintaining the status quo. It also found that allowing the companies to close could result in operational consolidation, the exchange of competitively sensitive information and employee terminations or reassignments that would be extremely difficult to reverse. 

Once the corporate omelet has been cooked, courts are generally not enthusiastic about being asked to put the eggs back in their shells.

The judge also declined to accept Paramount’s argument that greater efficiency in streaming would offset potential damage in the theatrical market. That does not mean the streaming argument is irrelevant to the final case, but it was not enough to defeat the states’ request for temporary relief. 

Paramount Says the States Are Fighting the Wrong Industry

Paramount argues that the states have defined the entertainment market too narrowly.

Its position is that Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery do not merely compete with Disney, Universal and Sony. They compete with Netflix, Amazon, Apple, YouTube and technology companies with vastly greater resources than most legacy Hollywood studios.

That argument deserves more than a dismissive shrug.

Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery are both trying to survive an industry in which cable revenue continues to deteriorate, theatrical attendance remains inconsistent and streaming requires enormous spending before anyone discovers whether there is a sustainable business underneath it.

Paramount insists that combining the companies would create a stronger competitor, increase investment in films and television, and provide consumers with a more credible alternative to the largest technology backed entertainment platforms.

The Trump administration’s Department of Justice reached a similar conclusion when it closed its investigation in June. The Antitrust Division said its extensive review indicated that the transaction would increase competition and benefit American consumers and workers. 

The European Commission has also approved the merger, although it imposed conditions involving Paramount’s European film distribution relationship with Universal. The United Kingdom’s Competition and Markets Authority is still examining the transaction. 

The States and Writers See Fewer Doors

The states argue that creating scale by removing another major competitor is not a solution. It is merely concentration wearing a more fashionable suit.

The combined company would control two of Hollywood’s five major film studios, more than 50 basic cable channels, CBS, CNN, HBO, Showtime, Paramount+, HBO Max, Discovery+ and three major television production operations. 

For movie theaters, fewer major distributors could mean less negotiating leverage, less favorable revenue sharing and fewer films receiving wide theatrical releases.

For writers, actors, directors and production workers, fewer independent buyers can mean fewer places to pitch a project, fewer competing employment offers and greater power concentrated within one corporate structure.

That is the heart of the WGA’s separate Clayton Act case. The guild argues that the merger would reduce writing opportunities, weaken compensation and leave creators with fewer employers. The July 24 standstill agreement applies to both the states’ lawsuit and the WGA action. 

Paramount says a stronger company would produce more. The WGA fears a larger company would have more power to produce less and pay less for it.

Welcome to the actual fight.

Has Politics Replaced What Is Best for the Industry?

The political divide is impossible to ignore.

Every attorney general involved in the state lawsuit is a Democrat. The Trump administration’s Justice Department, meanwhile, cleared the merger and issued an unusually detailed statement arguing that the transaction would strengthen competition.

Critics have also raised questions about the Ellison family’s relationship with President Trump and about what Paramount ownership could mean for CNN, particularly after the editorial upheaval surrounding CBS News. 

There is no court finding that the Justice Department’s decision was politically motivated. The party affiliation of the attorneys general does not invalidate their market analysis either.

But the optics are dreadful.

One political camp sees the merger as a necessary counterweight to Netflix and Big Tech. The other sees it as an illegal concentration of entertainment, news and employment power. Each side insists it is protecting consumers, workers and democracy, which is generally the moment one should check that the silverware is still on the table.

The more important question is whether either side is still focused on the structural problem facing the industry.

Legacy studios need greater scale to compete with technology companies capable of subsidizing entertainment from cloud computing, advertising, hardware sales and other businesses. Yet repeatedly combining studios also leaves fewer buyers for creative work, fewer independent decision makers and an ever smaller number of companies deciding what gets produced and distributed.

Hollywood is being asked to choose between concentration and irrelevance. Neither option looks especially healthy.

The $7 Million Daily Meter

The delay comes with a substantial financial cost.

Paramount agreed to pay Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders an additional 25 cents per share for every quarter the merger remains incomplete after September 30, 2026. That works out to approximately $650 million per quarter, or roughly $7 million per day.

Should the legal battle run until June 2027, Paramount’s additional payments could approach $1.7 billion. 

Paramount accepted that provision while competing against Netflix for Warner Bros. Discovery. It helped make Paramount’s offer more attractive by transferring much of the regulatory delay risk away from WBD shareholders.

The company cannot now act surprised that someone eventually turned on the meter.

What This Means for Subscribers

Nothing changes immediately for Paramount+ or HBO Max subscribers.

The services will remain under separate ownership while the cases proceed, and the companies cannot begin integrating their operations under the proposed transaction. Any combined streaming platform, unified technology system or larger corporate restructuring must wait.

That does not prevent Paramount+ or HBO Max from independently changing prices, programming or subscription tiers. Streaming companies have never required a federal judge’s assistance to make a monthly bill more irritating.

The longer delay also leaves open major questions involving theatrical distribution, physical media, licensing arrangements, CNN and CBS News, and the future of overlapping cable networks.

Employees face the least appealing version of corporate uncertainty: potentially ten months of waiting to learn whether their departments will eventually be combined, sold, reduced or eliminated.

The Bottom Line

The Paramount Warner Bros. Discovery merger has moved beyond regulatory review and into a full contest over what competition in modern entertainment actually means.

Paramount has a legitimate argument that traditional media companies need greater scale to compete with Netflix, Amazon, Apple and YouTube. The states and the WGA have an equally legitimate concern that combining two of Hollywood’s five major studios could reduce competition for audiences, theaters and creative workers.

The court must now decide which market definition reflects reality: the narrower world of studios, theatrical distribution and cable licensing, or the much larger ecosystem dominated by global streaming and technology platforms.

Politics has not merely entered the discussion. It is sitting at the head of the table and asking everyone else to explain themselves.

The merger might still happen. It might be blocked. It could also collapse beneath the weight of legal fees, ticking payments and corporate fatigue.

For now, Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery remain competitors, the trial clock has started and the financial clock begins on September 30.

Hollywood wanted a new empire. It received two antitrust cases, a political war and a $7 million daily invoice.

Related Reading:

Prentis, a new AI research lab focused on computer use models, co-founded by serial entrepreneur Ritankar Das and tech heavyweights Reid Hoffman and Mark Pincus, is in talks to raise $100 million at a $1 billion valuation, according to two people familiar with the discussions.

Launched in April, Prentis is training models to learn how office workers navigate routine workflows across documents and systems, with the goal of building AI agents that can control computers to automate those tasks.

Prentis will ostensibly develop agents tailored to these customers’ needs, such as handling insurance claims and automating customs duty refund exceptions without needing a human to hunt down paperwork.

The startup has already signed contracts worth up to $50 million with several customers, including healthcare management service organization, a manufacturer, and goods and clothing manufacturers, the two people familiar with the discussions tell TechCrunch. This echoes investor materials obtained by TechCrunch that predict an estimated $75 million annualized run rate by the third quarter of this year. (Prentis’ pitch deck notes those figures reflect estimated annualized value based on a contracted fee equal to 20% of savings realized, not recognized revenue, and are “performance-dependent and subject to final execution.”)

By its own account, Prentis says its Hive-32B model outperforms rivals, including OpenAI’s GPT-5.4 and Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.6, on two computer-use benchmarks: WindowsAgentArena, which measures end-to-end task completion on real Windows applications, and ScreenSpot-v2, which tests a model’s ability to locate the right on-screen control.

In its pitch deck, the company argues its edge comes from running a much smaller, cheaper model. In fact, it claims roughly 10 times lower cost per task than frontier APIs, saying it’s more economical to deploy across everyday workflows. TechCrunch hasn’t independently verified the company’s benchmark results.

The startup is betting that automating everyday office tasks will soon outpace coding as AI’s biggest use case, but it’s a crowded market. Anthropic, Open AI, and Mira Murati’s Thinking Machines Lab are also working on developing AI agents for computer use, one of the sources said. Anthropic has also been acquiring talent in the category directly — it bought the Seattle computer-use startup Vercept earlier this year, folding in its founders and shutting down its product.

Prentis didn’t respond to TechCrunch’s request for comment.

Ritankar Das, CEO of Prentis, is also the founder of Titan, a holding company that builds and operates AI companies. Das, now 31, was UC Berkeley’s youngest University Medalist in more than a century, graduating at 18 with a double major in bioengineering and chemical biology before earning a master’s in biomedical engineering at Oxford.

He founded Titan in 2014 after dropping out of an AI PhD program at Cambridge, where he’d been a Gates Cambridge Scholar. Das has described Titan as an intentional throwback to an old-fashioned holding-company model like Berkshire Hathaway, one that’s funded by its own exits rather than outside limited partners.

Other businesses launched and operated by Titan include AI-powered virtual care provider Tala Health, which raised a $100 million seed round last year, and Forta Health, an autism care startup that raised $55 million led by Insight Partners in 2024. Titan-founded disease prediction company Dascena was acquired by CirrusDx in 2022.

Prentis is a side project of sorts for its two other co-founders. Hoffman, the LinkedIn co-founder and Greylock partner, said last month that he was stepping down from Microsoft’s board after nearly a decade to go “founder mode” on Manas AI, an AI drug-discovery startup he’s also backing; he was an early OpenAI investor and co-founded Inflection AI with Mustafa Suleyman before Microsoft absorbed most of that team in 2024.

Pincus, the Zynga founder, now runs the investment firm Reinvent Capital with Hoffman as a senior adviser, and published a memoir, “Life at the Speed of Play,” last month.

Prentis has already hired more than 25 employees, including researchers who previously worked at OpenAI, Google DeepMind, Meta, Tencent, and Alibaba, according to its website.

A woman who stole from a Wendy’s returned for her AirPods, a shooting followed an argument about an Apple Watch, and another FedEx robbery in Memphis, all in this week’s Apple Crime Blotter.

The latest in an occasional AppleInsider feature, looking at the world of Apple-related crime.

Second man arrested in FedEx theft of iPhones

A second suspect has been arrested in the $30,000 theft of Apple products from a FedEx shipment in Miami-Dade County in November of 2025, CBS Miami reported.

The suspect was arrested on July 15 and faces cargo theft charges.

The other suspect was arrested in June, and both men were FedEx employees.

Woman who stole from Wendy’s returned for her lost AirPod

A Delaware woman who was accused of attacking a worker and stealing from the register at a Dover Wendy’s later returned when she realized she’d left behind an AirPod.

According to NBC Philadelphia, police say the 33-year-old woman had attacked a store employee after complaining about her order and asking for a refund. After the worker refused, the woman took $15 from the register and “attacked” a worker standing in the way.

She then turned her attention to a second employee, whom she punched “multiple times in the chest,” before throwing the stolen money out the window. Before leaving, she “threatened to shoot restaurant employees.”

Shortly afterward, she returned to look for lost AirPods, and officers who were there to investigate arrested her. She was charged with strong-arm burglary, conspiracy, terroristic threats, and related offenses.

Non-fatal Burger King shooting followed argument over a stolen Apple Watch

In another incident at a fast food restaurant, a man was shot outside a Memphis Burger King on July 14, in a dispute that followed an argument over a stolen Apple Watch.

According to Fox 13 Memphis, two men accused a third man of stealing an Apple Watch from them. This led to a fight, in which one of the men was shot, and his son was injured. The man who was shot was reportedly in critical condition.

The two men accused of the shooting fled but were later caught. One was charged with attempted second-degree murder and the other with being an accomplice.

Two arrested for taking over $130,000 in iPhones

Also in Memphis, two men were arrested on July 15 and charged with stealing 120 iPhone 17 Pros and 50 Tinymoose smart pens from a FedEx processing facility.

According to Action News 5, the two men were caught on camera taking the items, which had a total value of $133,377.

Sheriff’s Deputy accused of taking, sharing nude photos of suspects

A sheriff’s deputy in Bucks County, Pa., was charged on July 21 with taking photographs of naked suspects and prisoners and using his personal iPhone to share the photos with colleagues and other contacts. He’s also accused of lying to investigators.

In an announcement from the Bucks County district attorney, the deputy has been charged with official oppression, unsworn falsification to authorities, possessing an instrument of crime, and obstructing the administration of law or other government function.

He was also removed from his position in June.

A court-authorized forensic search of the deputy’s iPhone uncovered some of the images, the D.A.’s office said.

During one incident, when he and other deputies arrived for an arrest, the then-deputy covered his own body camera.

However, “the body camera of another deputy in the room captured footage of [the deputy] removing his right glove, pulling out his personal cellphone, opening the camera application, and pointing the camera lens directly at the male.”

AirPods, other items stolen from 17-year-old during cancer surgery

A 17-year-old in San Diego had several items stolen from her at the worst possible time: While she was undergoing surgery for Stage 4 pancreatic cancer.

According to Fox 5 San Diego, Sahara Morquecho was in surgery at UC San Diego Health when her purse was stolen, containing her “wallet, jewelry, ID, cash and sentimental photos of her late father,” in addition to AirPods.

While recovering, the teen followed the Find My iPhone signal and discovered the AirPods at a residence in Lemon Grove.

When a deputy went to that address, the resident wasn’t home. However, the landlord provided the person’s name, and she had prior arrests for theft.

She also worked at that hospital.

Man who stole iPad from porch in Bronx fled in a Mercedes

Police are searching for a man who they say stole an iPad delivery from a porch in the Bronx.

Bronx News 12 reports the box was taken on June 12 by a man in an orange hoodie, who fled in a surprisingly fancy car. It was a black Mercedes-Benz.

AirTag placed in stolen campaign sign leads to theft charges for county commissioner

It’s far from rare for politicians’ lawn signs to be stolen, sometimes by a rival campaign. Such expeditions rarely lead to criminal charges, but that happened on July 20 in Tennessee, thanks to an AirTag.

According to WKRN in Nashville, Rutherford County Commissioner Romel McMurry surrendered to authorities after he was named in a theft arrest warrant. He’s accused of taking a sign for his opponent, Pat Clements.

After a series of sign-stealing incidents, Clements told the station that he placed an AirTag in one of his signs. That very sign went missing, and the signal later pinged near McMurry’s home.

McMurry told the station that he did not steal the sign, but rather “relocated” it.

Man accused of crime disconnected iPad during virtual hearing

A New Hampshire man accused of dragging a police officer during a June traffic stop in Massachusetts appeared in court virtually from his jail cell, via iPad. But during the hearing, he “started yelling, grabbed the iPad, and disconnected from the call,” WHDH reported.

He is charged with several crimes, including assault with intent to murder, assault and battery on a police officer, aggravated assault and battery, failure to stop for police, reckless operation of a motor vehicle, and resisting arrest.

Stolen iPhones recovered in Uganda

Police tracing the stolen iPhones belonging to a police officer in Kampala, Uganda, discovered a large cache of stolen iPhones, as well as other Apple products.

According to Pulse, investigators “traced the phone to an alleged network dealing in suspected stolen iPhones and spare parts.” The man who stole the phone admitted that he had sold it to a mobile phone shop.

Between the searches of the shop and the owner’s vehicle, police discovered over a hundred stolen iPhones, as well as iPads, laptops, and iPhone spare parts.

Four suspects have been arrested for their part in the scheme.

Apple TV paid a visit to San Diego Comic-Con, hosting a two-hour panel and revealing new trailers for “Dark Matter,” “Neuromancer,” and the loosely toy-based “Matchbox The Movie.”

Just like any major media company that streams movies and TV shows, Apple held a lengthy two-hour panel at San Diego Comic-Con. The panels are usually an opportunity for fans to see stars talk about past and upcoming projects, as well as the reveal of new trailers for inbound releases.

As part of Saturday’s panel, Apple introduced a trio of new trailers for two shows and a movie.

Matchbox The Movie

Hall H was given the first look at a new Apple Original Film based on a Mattel toy franchise. Coming from Skydance Media and Mattel Studios, “Matchbox The Movie” stars John Cena, Sam Richardson, and Jessica Biel, and takes an unusual direction.

While the usual expectation would be a very toy-focused approach, the film instead seems more like an homage to “The Fast and The Furious.” The toys do still appear in the film, though.

Cena stars as an undercover CIA agent who returns to a small town and teams up with a group of his childhood friends. Cue an international pursuit to save the world with lots of vehicular stunts.

“Matchbox The Movie” will air on Apple TV on October 9.

Neuromancer

AppleInsider first heard about “Neuromancer,” based on the William Gibson novels, in February 2024. More than two years later, there’s a trailer for the show.

A ten-episode series, it stars Callum Turner, who made a surprise virtual appearance for the panel. It also counts Briana Middleton, Mark Strong, Joseph Lee, Peter Sarsgaard and Clemence Poesy in its cast.

The show follows top-tier hacker Case, who lands in trouble involving high-stakes crime and espionage with assassin partner Molly, and a heist on a corporate dynasty.

Produced by Paramount Television and Anonymous Content, “Neuromancer” will premiere on Apple TV with two episodes on July 22, 2027, followed by one episode a week until March 19.

Dark Matter Season 2

Apple offered a sneak peek of the second season of “Dark Matter” in April, and continued the charge with a full trailer at Comic-Con.

Based on the novel by Black Crouch, the first season had physicist-professor Jason Dessen be abducted and taken to an alternate version of his life, and followed his attempts to return back home. The second season has Dessen getting used to a quiet life in a seemingly safe world, until they are forced to run once again.

Starring Joel Edgerton and Jennifer Connelly, the cast also includes Alice Braga, Jimmi Simpson, Oakes Fedley, Amanda Brugel, and Dayo Okeniyi.

This time, there will also be “Dark Matter: The Official Podcast” accompanying the show. Author Crouch and executive producer Jacquelyn Ben-Zekry will discuss the show’s biggest moments, the creative process, and the science behind the multiverse.

Produced by Sony Pictures Television, “Dark Matter” will premiere on Apple TV from August 28, 2026, with one episode a week released until October 30.

Humans discovered the first exoplanet in 1992 and have since found approximately 6,000 other planets from outside our solar system. Not once have those researchers found a moon orbiting any of those planets, however. That may have changed with the recent discovery of the first moon-like object in another solar system. 

The findings were published in a recent study. Kevin Hoy, lead author of the study and PhD student at the Instituto de Estudios Astrofísicos, says that this potential moon, known as CD-35 2722 B, orbits a brown dwarf instead of a traditional planet. It’s also approximately 90% the size of Jupiter and bigger than Saturn. This moon-like object takes 170 days to fully orbit its host. 

Hoy and other researchers used a fairly old trick to discover this moon: radial velocity analysis, which is used to detect wobbles in stars and is an indication that an exoplanet is nearby. Planets get dimmer as they move away from their host star, and exoplanets are found by viewing the changes in spectral shift.

This is the same method scientists used to detect the first exoplanet, and it was used to detect this exosatellite, which is the name granted to objects that have not yet been defined as an exoplanet or an exomoon.

“This is the first time, to our knowledge, this technique has produced evidence of satellites around a companion brown dwarf,” Hoy said in the study.

Schrödinger’s Moon?

The study’s findings aren’t without their controversy. Arguably, the biggest question is whether this is actually a moon. Brown dwarves, often referred to as failed stars, are far larger than a standard planet but did not have the chemical reactions in their core necessary to become a star. The exosatellite orbiting this brown dwarf is also bigger than all but one planet in our solar system and larger than most of the exoplanets discovered by researchers so far. 

Complicating matters is the fact that no one actually knows what a moon is. There is no standard definition from the International Astronomical Union, the authority that usually comes up with such definitions. Most people understand a moon to be a naturally occurring object that orbits a larger object, like our moon orbits Earth. 

There are some rules to this. The host object can’t be a star because then the orbiting object would be a planet. It also can’t be made by humans, or it’s deemed a satellite. The definition has expanded as astronomers find additional, unique types of moons. One example is Zoozve, a quasi-moon that would look like a moon from the surface of Venus but is actually an asteroid that orbits the sun and is close enough to look like a moon. 

For CD-35 2722 B, Hoy told me that one problem is the special nature of brown dwarfs. Brown dwarfs are considered substellar objects because they’re too big and dense to be a planet but lack the hydrogen fusion needed to be a star. They exist in a middle ground between the two, so it’s unclear whether something orbiting a brown dwarf would be considered a planet or a moon. 

That isn’t the only roadblock. “The object itself is at least the mass of Jupiter, which is far larger than the rocky and icy moons in the solar system,” Hoy said. “It’s not clear that anything that big should be considered a moon.”

Hoy says that the currently accepted IAU definitions group brown dwarfs in with stars, in that an object orbiting a brown dwarf of sufficient size would be considered a planet. However, this brown dwarf orbits its host star like a planet and CD-35 2722 B orbits the brown dwarf like a moon; therefore, it fulfills both the behavior of a moon and the definition of a planet. 

“Maybe when a definition for exomoons is written, objects like this will meet both the definitions of planet and moon, but we’ll have to see,” Hoy said. “Those terms are mutually exclusive in the solar system, so I wouldn’t be surprised if they wrote the definition in such a way as to preserve that.”

Until that day comes, no one is quite sure what to make of CD-35 2722 B, and until the IAU opens up the metaphorical box and comes up with an official definition for what a moon is, CD-35 2722 B could realistically be considered both a moon and a planet.

Sources told The Wall Street Journal that a sale could earn the three-year-old start-up roughly $10bn.

Stripe is reportedly in talks to acquire OpenRouter, a New York-based start-up that lets users access several AI models through a unified platform.

According to The Wall Street Journal (TWSJ), a transaction could earn OpenRouter roughly $10bn. It was last valued, reportedly, at around $1.3bn following a $113m raise in May led by Alphabet’s venture arm CapitalG.

Sources told the TWSJ that a deal could be announced soon. SiliconRepublic.com has reached out to Stripe to confirm the validity of the report.

Founded in 2023, OpenRouter is a new type of marketplace that offers users access to more than 400 large language models (LLMs) from around 70 providers. It routes requests to the best available provider, letting users shop around based on price and other factors.

It is claimed to be the first marketplace set up for LLMs, reflecting a growing appetite for AI models and a fast diversifying market. The company more than doubled its valuation in a year, after reaching the $500m milestone last June.

A number of other companies have also considered buying OpenRouter, sources further told TWSJ. The Information also reported on the buzz around the start-up.

OpenRouter co-founder and CEO Alex Atallah has described his company as an AI equivalent of Stripe, a payments processing platform with an array of different tools for businesses. Prior to his current venture, Atallah founded OpenSea, a similar type of marketplace for non-fungible tokens.

OpenRouter already uses Stripe’s services for billing, payment collection and tax, among other needs, under a partnership announced early this year.

Stripe, meanwhile, is also reportedly considering a joint acquisition of PayPal along with US private equity firm Advent International. Sources told TWSJ that PayPal is unhappy with the low-ball reported offer of $53bn. Stripe and Advent are considering their next move.

Don’t miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic’s digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.