Paramount representatives are reportedly preparing to meet with California attorney general Rob Bonta on Monday (August 24) to discuss a possible
Paramount representatives are reportedly preparing to meet with California attorney general Rob Bonta on Monday (August 24) to discuss a possible settlement of the antitrust case to block the proposed $111bn Warner Bros Discovery (WBD) merger.
It was unclear how deep talks will go, however it is understood a judge last week requested both sides identify magistrates to preside over a mediation process. An antitrust trial is scheduled for March 2, 2027.
Bonta, 11 other state attorneys general, and Writers Guild Of America (WGA) claim the merger is anti-competition. Paramount CEO David Ellison and his representatives have said they believe they would win a case on its merits.
Both sides have expressed readiness to engage in settlement talks. However Ellison has also threatened to start moving Paramount out of California in October should the lawsuit not be settled. Bonta has described the comment as attempted blackmail.
A ticking fee agreed upon by Ellison and WBD CEO David Zaslav kicks in after September 30, the date by when corporations were targeting the closure of the transaction. The fee would see Paramount required to pay WBD shareholders approximately $7m a day, or $650m a quarter.
Earlier this week Paramount’s lawyers filed a legal request that the plaintiffs in the antitrust cases pay a $1.9bn bond by September 30 to to cover financial harm caused by the delay in closing the deal.
On Friday the outgoing California Governor Gavin Newsom commented on the notion of settlement talks when he said, “I think there’s some universal sentiment there, if that’s possible.”
Directors Guild of America, IATSE, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, and Cinema United have all said they are in favour of a settlement.
Ellison has pledged that a combined Paramount-Warner Bros would release 30 films a year theatrically, however that is insufficient for Bonta, who is arguing for a structural remedy. Structural remedies are one-time amendments to corporate architecture, such as divesting a number of cable channels, that are easier to enforce than behavioural remedies like Ellison’s theatrical slate promise.
At time of writing the parties had not commented on reports of the talks.
