Category: 3. Business

  • Death of beloved neighborhood cat sparks outrage against robotaxis in San Francisco | San Francisco

    Death of beloved neighborhood cat sparks outrage against robotaxis in San Francisco | San Francisco

    The death of beloved neighborhood cat named KitKat, which was struck and killed by a Waymo in San Francisco’s Mission District last week, is sparking uproar in the city and across the internet. Now local politicians and community leaders are harnessing momentum to put new limits on the fast-spreading autonomous vehicle industry.

    KitKat was a regular fixture at the deli and liquor store Randa’s Market, and was well known in the neighborhood and on social media. In a recent podcast interview, Daniel Zeidan, part of the family that owns Randa’s, described KitKat as unequivocally adored.

    “The nickname that they had for him was the mayor of 16th Street,” Zeidan said. “He would walk down there, stare up at the employees and wait for them to throw chicken at him … He really ran the block.”

    But on 27 October, KitKat was struck by a Waymo autonomous vehicle, which in recent years has become a ubiquitous sight around the city. Waymo confirmed the death in a statement to the Guardian. “While our vehicle was stopped to pick up passengers, a nearby cat darted under our vehicle as it was pulling away,” a company spokesperson said.

    Tributes have poured in across social media for KitKat, who could often be found curled up behind the counter at Randa’s, or strolling into the nearby Dalva bar to receive a royal reception. A shrine has popped up outside of Randa’s, replete with photos of KitKat, bouquets of flowers and well-wishes.

    Local legislators are using the incident to call for limits on the industry’s growth. Jackie Fielder, a San Francisco city supervisor, said she plans to introduce legislation that would allow counties to decide whether they will permit the operation of autonomous vehicles, and is calling upon the California legislature to consider doing the same. Fielder said the bill will be similar to a 2024 effort in the California legislature.

    “We are absolutely coming for your bottom dollar,” Fielder said of Waymo in a Tuesday press conference held outside of Randa’s Market. Speakers included local politicians, union leaders and transit advocates, who touched on fears of job replacement via AI and the loss of local political control against tech companies.

    Justin Dolezal, a local bar owner and head of a small business coalition, also spoke about KitKat’s role in the community, and in favor of the resolution.

    “The mayor of this space was taken by technology that none of us asked for, and crucially to this resolution, none of us consented to,” Dozel said.

    KitKat’s death is the latest swell in waves of anti-AI sentiment and concerns over autonomous vehicles, although others point to data showing a firm safety record. While Waymo says it operates around 1,500 cars across the US, exact numbers for San Francisco’s fleet are unclear. Protestors and activists have taken to disabling Waymos by placing traffic cones on their hoods or even setting them on fire. Cruise, another autonomous taxi company, agreed last year to shell out more than $8m in 2024 to a Bay Area woman who was dragged over 20ft of pavement by an autonomous vehicle. Questions have also arisen over how to ticket and discipline autonomous vehicles when they violate traffic laws.

    Waymo declined to comment on the proposed legislation in a written statement to the Guardian but said that “trust and the safety of the communities we serve is our highest priority”.

    “We send our deepest sympathies to the cat’s owner and the community who knew and loved him, and we have made a donation to a local animal rights organization in his honor,” the statement said.

    As politicians push for change, some have taken upon themselves to honor KitKat in distinctly Silicon Valley-style ways. Zeidan has released a memecoin honoring KitKat’s legacy, and also said that he was disappointed to see others launch their own imitation tokens in an attempt to profit off KitKat’s death.

    Zeidan hopes to use proceeds to support local veterinarians and animal welfare organizations. He was inspired to do so after the veterinarian that attempted to save KitKat’s life dropped the cost of the entire medical bill.

    “We wanted to honor the cat,” Zeidan said. “We want to support shelters, we want to support local animal organizations that help animals.”


    Continue Reading

  • Fortnite maker and Google settle five-year legal fight over Android app store | Technology

    Fortnite maker and Google settle five-year legal fight over Android app store | Technology

    Fortnite maker Epic Games has reached a “comprehensive settlement” with Google that could end its five-year legal crusade targeting Google’s Play Store for Android apps, both companies revealed in a joint legal filing.

    Epic CEO Tim Sweeney called the settlement an “awesome proposal” in a social media post.

    Google and Epic Games said the settlement “would allow the parties to put their disputes aside while making Android a more vibrant and competitive platform for users and developers,” according to the document, filed in a San Francisco federal court Tuesday.

    skip past newsletter promotion

    Epic, which makes the hit online game Fortnite, won a victory over Google in the summer when a federal appeals court upheld a jury verdict condemning the Android app store as an illegal monopoly. The unanimous ruling cleared the way for a federal judge to enforce a potentially disruptive shake-up that’s designed to give consumers more choices.

    The specific terms of the settlement agreement remain under seal and must be approved by US district judge James Donato, but the two companies broadly outlined some of their agreements in their joint filing. A hearing is set for Thursday.

    They said the settlement closely follows Donato’s October 2024 ruling ordering Google to tear down the digital walls shielding its Android app store from competition. That included a provision that will require its app store to distribute rival third-party app stores so consumers can download them to their phones, if they so desire.

    Google had hoped to void those changes with an appeal, but the ruling issued in July by the ninth circuit court of appeals delivered a legal blow for the tech company, which has been waylaid in three separate antitrust trials affecting different pillars of its internet empire.

    Epic Games filed lawsuits targeting Google’s Play Store as well as Apple’s iPhone App Store in 2020 in an attempt to bypass exclusive payment processing systems that charged 15% to 30% commissions on in-app transactions. The settlement agreement proposed Tuesday calls for Google to limit those payments to between 9% and 20%, depending on the transaction.

    Continue Reading

  • Linklaters advises IFM on the acquisition of leading data centre operator Green

    Linklaters advises IFM on the acquisition of leading data centre operator Green

    Linklaters market-leading Private Capital and Digital Infrastructure team has advised a fund managed by IFM Investors, on the successful acquisition of Green Group AG and its subsidiaries (Green) from InfraVia. 

    Green is a Swiss-based digital infrastructure platform operating hyperscale and enterprise data centres. It is a market leader in Switzerland’s fast-growing data centre market, benefiting from long-term contracts with leading global cloud service providers, as well as enterprise customers. 

    The cross-practice Linklaters team was led by Corporate Partners Michael Honan and Nicole Meyer, Energy & Infrastructure Partner Ross Schloeffel and TMT Partner Rich Jones. 

    The transaction was signed in July 2025 and completed on 30 October 2025.

    Continue Reading

  • Bombardier Global 8000, World’s Fastest Business Jet, Awarded Transport Canada Type Certification

    Bombardier Global 8000, World’s Fastest Business Jet, Awarded Transport Canada Type Certification

    • The Global 8000(1) sets industry benchmark by exceeding original cabin altitude target, confirmed at 2,691 ft. at 41,000 ft., making it the lowest in civilian aircraft in production
    • The Global 8000, the fastest civilian aircraft since the Concorde, confirms industry-leading top speed of Mach 0.95 and class-leading range of 8,000 nautical miles (NM)
    • Program on track for entry into service in 2025

    Bombardier today announced that the Global 8000(1), the world’s fastest business aircraft, has been awarded Transport Canada Type Certification, paving the way for entry-into-service this year. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) certification will follow, aligned with delivery requirements.

    This accomplishment marks the latest in a series of monumental achievements for Bombardier’s Global 8000  business jet, which went supersonic in testing, completed its inaugural first production flight in May and recently announced a new top speed of Mach 0.95. The aircraft has also completed its type certification with a new industry benchmark for cabin altitude – 2,691 ft. at 41,000 ft., the best of any business aircraft in production.

    “Bombardier has worked rigorously and collaboratively with Transport Canada toward certification for the Global 8000. This marks a pivotal milestone for Bombardier, our customers and the entire business aviation industry – solidifying the Global 8000’s position as the unrivaled leader setting a new standard,” said Stephen McCullough, Senior Vice President, Engineering and Product Development, Bombardier. “This milestone is a powerful testament to the exceptional talent and dedication of our engineering, test and production teams. It showcases their deep expertise and unwavering commitment – qualities that are embedded in Bombardier’s DNA and are the heartbeat that drives everything we do for our valued clients.”

    With the lowest cabin altitude in business aviation at 2,691 ft., customers will feel like they are standing atop the Burj Khalifa as they cruise at 41,000 feet. This significantly reduced cabin altitude minimizes the physiological stress typically associated with high-altitude travel, helping passengers arrive feeling refreshed, alert, and ready to perform.  When paired with Bombardier’s Pũr Air system (featuring HEPA filtration and VOC removal) and the Soleil circadian lighting system, the aircraft creates an environment that actively combats jet lag and enhances overall wellness. Combined with its luxurious interior, signature smooth ride and unparalleled performance capabilities, the Global 8000 is the clear choice for discerning owners and operators who prioritize speed, comfort, convenience and productivity. 

    Building on its comfort and industry-defining cabin altitude, the Global 8000 also leads in performance. On top of an industry-defining top speed of Mach 0.95, the Bombardier Global 8000 will also be able to fly customers farther, faster than any competing four-zone business jet in the industry.

    The Global 8000 is also the only four-zone business jet to offer a range of 8,000 NM, enabling nonstop travel between more city pairs than ever before. In addition to its long-range capabilities, the aircraft remains remarkably agile, with takeoff and landing performance comparable to that of a light jet. Its advanced wing design featuring unique leading-edge slats enable customers to master 30% more airports than its closest rival.

    Inside, the Global 8000 aircraft sets an extremely high bar in terms of luxury and comfort. This trailblazing business jet will offer exceptional comfort, featuring four true living spaces and a separate crew rest area. The discerning business jet will also feature the longest seated length size in its class along with the industry’s healthiest cabin and the lowest cabin altitude, designed to maximize passenger comfort and productivity throughout their travels.

    About Bombardier

    At Bombardier (BBD-B.TO), we design, build, modify and maintain the world’s best-performing aircraft for the world’s most discerning people and businesses, governments and militaries. That means not simply exceeding standards, but understanding customers well enough to anticipate their unspoken needs.

    For them, we are committed to pioneering the future of aviation—innovating to make flying more reliable, efficient and sustainable. And we are passionate about delivering unrivaled craftsmanship and care, giving our customers greater confidence and the elevated experience they deserve and expect. Because people who shape the world will always need the most productive and responsible ways to move through it.

    Bombardier customers operate a fleet of more than 5,100 aircraft, supported by a vast network of Bombardier team members worldwide and 10 service facilities across six countries. Bombardier’s performance-leading jets are proudly manufactured in aerostructure, assembly and completion facilities in Canada, the United States and Mexico. In 2024, Bombardier was honoured with the prestigious “Red Dot: Best of the Best” award for Brands and Communication Design.     

    For Information

    For corporate news and information, including Bombardier’s Sustainability report, as well as the company’s initiative to cover all its flight operations with a Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) blend utilizing the Book-and-Claim system visit
    bombardier.com.

    Learn more about Bombardier’s industry-leading products and customer service network at bombardier.com. Follow us on X @Bombardier.

    Media Contacts

    General media contact webform

    Matthew Nicholls
    +1-514-243-8214
    Matthew.Nicholls@aero.bombardier.com

    (1) The Global 8000 aircraft received Transport Canada Type Certification on November 5, 2025; certification from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration and from the European Aviation Safety Agency is pending. All specification and data are subject to certain operating rules, assumptions and other conditions. It is expected to enter into service in 2025. Please also see the forward-looking statements disclaimer at the end of this press release.

    Bombardier, Global, Global 8000, Soleil and Pũr Air are registered or unregistered trademarks of Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries

    Forward-looking statements
    This press release contains certain forward-looking statements. By their nature, forward-looking statements require the Corporation to make assumptions and are subject to important known and unknown risks and uncertainties, which may cause actual results in future periods to differ materially from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. Please refer to the “Forward-Looking Statements” disclaimer contained in Bombardier Inc.’s most recently published financial report for additional details.

    Continue Reading

  • Call for interest: Global Carbon Emissions Accounting Experts – ICC

    Call for interest: Global Carbon Emissions Accounting Experts – ICC

    The International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and Carbon Measures – a global coalition of leading businesses committed to advancing a ledger-based carbon accounting framework – are seeking a select group of top experts to join a Technical Expert Panel (TEP) on Carbon Accounting.

    The experts are solicited from a range of perspectives and geographies from academia, financial accounting, industry and civil society. Together, the expert panel will define the principles, scope and applications of a carbon emissions accounting system modelled on financial accounting principles.

    The system would provide accurate, transparent, verifiable, and timely company-level and product-level data, ensuring every tonne of carbon emissions is counted only once and attributed correctly at each step of the value chain.

    The panel will:

    • Inventory existing approaches for carbon emissions accounting, along with strengths, challenges and opportunities to generate alignment;
    • Develop guiding principles for a carbon emissions accounting framework that builds on positive attributes of existing carbon emissions accounting approaches, addresses the challenges to current practices and enables global alignment; guiding principles will also consider learnings from chemistry, financial accounting practices and product-level standard-setting successes;
    • Apply the principles to develop proposals to underpin adoption by standard-setters and policymakers;
    • Develop detailed product-level implementation roadmaps to foster real-world adoption;
    • Recommend ways to improve data quality, methods, and governance for global alignment and build consensus among stakeholders;
    • Determine a roadmap for implementation, including proposed standard-setters for adoption and the conditions that need to be in place to support successful adoption at scale, such as implementing organisations, attestation standards, enforcement requirements, education and oversight; and
    • Publish and endorse reports and peer-reviewed publications.

    For experts

    The Technical Expert Panel will comprise up to 20 highly qualified representatives with expertise in carbon emissions accounting, business governance, chemistry and geosciences, financial accounting and assurance, policy design and development or related work.

    Panellists will be selected by the Secretariat, in consultation with the Co-Chairs of the TEP (“TEP Co-Chairs”), with nominations and recommendations accepted from universities, private sector entities, governments, foundations, civil society organizations and individuals. Selection will prioritise subject matter expertise and will aim for geographic diversity whenever possible.

    Panellists will represent themselves in an individual capacity, and this designation will follow the expert if/when associated institution(s) or employer(s) change.

    At the outset, experts will be asked to make a two-year-long commitment to attending 1-2 monthly calls and undertaking 6-10 hours of independent document review per month. Public engagements may be offered to panellists as appropriate. These expectations may vary based on the initiative’s progress, but active and consistent participation will be expected from all panellists.

    To nominate an expert to the panel, send a CV and covering note to climateopportunity@iccwbo.org. Nominations will be reviewed on a rolling basis until 9 January 2026.

    Once reviewed, promising candidates will be invited to have a video call with the host organisations to discuss personal qualifications and goals in more detail.

    For Advisory Group members

    The panellists’ work will be supported by an Advisory Group of 25 members, comprising representatives of the private sector and non-profit organisations. Advisory Group members – represented by their CFOs, CSOs or other C-suite leaders, as appropriate – will be selected based on their willingness to act as ambassadors for the initiative, as well as progress the panel’s work by providing in-kind and/or financial support.

    The Advisory Group will meet no less than four times a year, with calls with individual entities scheduled on an as-needed basis.

    Organisations interested in joining the Advisory Group are welcome to share their motivations, related work and a brief overview of expected contributions.

    Initial suggestions may include:

    • Administrative secondments
    • Research and knowledge partnerships
    • Fundraising and/or direct donations
    • External communications support

    To submit an expression of interest for the Advisory Group, send a covering note to climateopportunity@iccwbo.org. Nominations will be reviewed on a rolling basis with an aim to finalise the Group’s composition in May 2026.

    Further details

    The panel will be co-chaired by Amy Brachio, CEO of Carbon Measures, and Karthik Ramanna, Professor of Business and Public Policy at the University of Oxford. S&P Global Insights will serve as the panel’s knowledge partner, providing research, data acquisition, expert analysis and independent thinking. The panel is expected to be fully formed in early 2026.

    “This panel will bring together experts from around the world—representing the financial accounting, chemical engineering, business, and academic communities—to develop the principles and implementation pathways to make a global carbon accounting framework a reality,” said Amy Brachio, CEO of Carbon Measures.


    2025 is a critical year for the Paris Agreement. Ten years on, we need to rethink how we frame the challenge. And seeing challenges differently is what business and we are all about.

    ICC is committed to securing what businesses need at the upcoming climate negotiations, COP30, in Belém, Brazil. Learn more about our Opportunity of a Lifetime climate campaign and how to get involved.

    Continue Reading

  • Persol Embraces a More Circular Future

    Persol has taken a meaningful step forward in helping strengthen its commitment to ‘Eyes on Circularity’, recently launching repair and care initiatives that extend the life of its products while honoring its legacy of timeless design. 

    Persol has now launched Care Week, putting craftsmanship at the heart of the consumer experience and Care Tips to raise awareness about care for their eyewear.

    From Nov. 3-9, a Care Week event is being held for the first time at Persol’s Brera boutique in Milan, inviting consumers to meet an artisan in-store and restore their beloved Persol eyewear. Dedicated services, such as frame polishing, fit & adjustments, and screw and nose pad replacement, offered a tangible way to give new life to iconic pieces — reflecting Persol’s commitment to impeccable quality and enduring appeal.  

    Through Care Tips, visitors to www.persol.com can now discover simple yet essential guidelines on how to protect, clean, maintain and wear their eyewear that preserve the beauty of the frames over time.  

     

     

    Collaborative Circularity in Action

     

    Persol’s sustainability journey mirrors other initiatives underway across EssilorLuxottica, underscoring a strong collaboration between its Operations and Retail teams.  

     

    Ray-Ban now offers permanent renewal services in one store in the US and 12 stores across EMEA. This initiative engages consumers with the opportunity to renew their sunglasses and eyeglasses by entrusting them to expert staff directly at points of sale, promoting the concept of circularity and extending the product life cycle.

     

     

    Eyes on Circularity, a Key Pillar of the EssilorLuxottica Sustainability Program

      

    As part of its ‘Eyes on the Planet’ sustainability program, the ‘Eyes on Circularity’ pillar reflects  EssilorLuxottica’s dedication to circularity goals along its value chain, leveraging sustainable innovation expertise across materials, processes, products and services.  

     

    In recent years, the Group has expanded its Direct-to-Consumer initiatives, positioning its retail operations as hubs for circularity by offering consumers specific services to extend product life or give products a second life. 

    Continue Reading

  • Convergent iridescence and divergent chemical signals in sympatric sister-species of Amazonian butterflies

    Convergent iridescence and divergent chemical signals in sympatric sister-species of Amazonian butterflies

    Numerous ecological interactions can impact trait evolution in closely-related species in sympatry, leading to trait convergence or divergence (terHorst et al., 2018). Closely-related species often display similar suites of traits because of their shared evolutionary history (Blomberg et al., 2003). Local selection can also act as a filter and prevent trait divergence (Keddy, 1992), therefore enhancing trait similarity between closely-related species when they occur in sympatry (Chazot et al., 2014). Trait similarity among sympatric species within a given ecological niche can thus stem from retention of locally adapted ancestral traits or from evolutionary convergence (Muschick et al., 2012). Selective pressures promoting the retention of locally adapted traits within species and/or trait convergence among sympatric species can also be due to local ecological interactions: for instance, shared predation pressure may promote the convergence of predator-deterrent traits in sympatry, but allow the trait to differentiate in allopatry (Mallet, 1999).

    However, when closely-related sympatric species share a given trait, either as a result of ancestry and/or convergence, they often diverge in other traits because (1) they may be partitioned in different ecological niches (Berlocher and Feder, 2002), or (2) as a result of character displacement due to reproductive interference (Grether et al., 2020) or reinforcement due to poor hybrid fitness (Butlin and Smadja, 2018). As a result, traits involved in sexual competition or mate choice tend to diverge significantly more often between species in sympatry compared to allopatry (Haavie et al., 2004; Marko, 2005).

    In this study, we investigate how ecological interactions in sympatry can constrain natural and sexual selection shaping trait evolution. We specifically focus on traits submitted to both natural and sexual selection and compare differences in these traits in allopatric vs. sympatric ranges. Theoretical and empirical studies have shown that sexual selection may favor the evolution of preferences for locally-adapted traits within species (Servedio, 2004; Servedio and Boughman, 2017; van Doorn et al., 2009). For instance, the predator-deterrent coloration of poison frogs is also detected and used as mating cues by females (Reynolds and Fitzpatrick, 2007). Similarly, habitat-dependent coloration of sympatric cichlid fish is also used as a visual cue for mate recognition (Seehausen et al., 2008). Yet, sexual interactions are likely to occur between individuals from closely-related species when they live in sympatry, and similar preferences for adaptive traits may thus result in substantial reproductive interference (Gröning and Hochkirch, 2008; Soni et al., 2025). Hybrids, when produced, can be unfit, thus favoring the evolution of sexual preferences for species-specific cues, rather than locally-adapted traits (Maisonneuve et al., 2024). To determine to what extent ecological interactions shape trait evolution, it is thus necessary to compare patterns of trait evolution in sympatry and allopatry: allopatric populations indeed allow us to estimate background levels of divergence or similarity that arise in the absence of direct ecological interactions (Pfennig and Pfennig, 2009). Comparing variations in adaptive traits in sympatric vs. allopatric populations of recently-diverged species and testing the sexual preference for those traits can shed light on the selective processes targeting traits modulating reproductive isolation and co-existence in sympatry.

    In butterflies, the evolution of wing color patterns can be influenced by both natural and sexual selection. The visual discrimination of wing color pattern can enable intraspecific recognition during courtship in many species (Costanzo and Monteiro, 2007; Li et al., 2017). However, the evolution of wing color patterns is also strongly influenced by the risk of detection and/or recognition by predators (Finkbeiner et al., 2014; Oliver et al., 2009). Whether these opposite selective pressures ultimately promote trait convergence or divergence in sympatric species might depend on their relatedness: for instance, a study in Papilionidae showed multiple color pattern convergences between distantly-related species living in sympatry, while divergent colorations are found in closely-related species (Puissant et al., 2023). Divergence in traits involved in species recognition could be favored because of higher reproductive interference in closely related species than in distantly related taxa (Pfennig and Pfennig, 2009). In sympatric species with chemical defenses, such as Heliconinii butterflies, local predation pressures tend to promote the convergence of similar conspicuous warning wing patterns compared to allopatric species (i.e. Müllerian mimicry, Joron et al., 1999; Merrill et al., 2014). But the costs associated with hybrid production, in turn, favor the evolution of alternative divergent mating cues in mimetic butterflies (Estrada and Jiggins, 2008), and divergence in male pheromone bouquets and female attraction has been found among mimetic sister species (González-Rojas et al., 2020). Similarly, the evolution of specific visual mate recognition signals, limiting reproductive interference but indistinguishable by predators, can also be promoted on the wings of mimetic butterflies (Llaurens et al., 2014).

    Here, we focus on the evolution of mating cues in the neotropical butterfly genus Morpho, where multiple closely-related species co-exist in sympatry (Blandin and Purser, 2013). In the Morpho species observed in the understory, striking iridescent blue coloration is displayed on the dorsal side of the wings, due to specific wing scale structures (Giraldo et al., 2016; Siddique et al., 2013). The light signal reflected by iridescent surfaces can be very directional, as hue and brightness of iridescent objects can drastically change depending on the light environment or the observer’s position (Doucet and Meadows, 2009). While the iridescent blue color is probably ancestral to the diversification of the understory clade (Chazot et al., 2021), the precise reflectance spectra at different angles likely differ among Morpho species. Directional iridescent signals generated in animals can likely enhance recognition by mates while remaining poorly detected by predators (Endler, 1992). In birds (Simpson and McGraw, 2019) and butterflies (White et al., 2015), the specific directional signal produced by the iridescent trait can be used as a cue during courtship, suggesting that the antagonistic sexual and natural selective pressures may finely tune the evolution of iridescent effects. How much sexual selection shapes the evolution of iridescent properties in sympatric Morpho species is currently unknown, but behavioral experiments carried out in the field in Amazonian Peru highlighted strong visually-based territorial interactions among males from sympatric species and limited species discrimination based on female coloration in males (Le Roy et al., 2021b).

    This raises questions on the key visual cues involved in mate choice, given that the iridescent blue coloration shared by closely-related species encountered within the understory is also likely under selection by predators. The iridescent bright blue dorsal coloration of Morpho wings contrasts with the brown and matte ventral side and generates a peculiar visual effect during flight. The combination of the blue flashes produced by the alternate exposure of the bright blue vs. brown sides of the wings during flapping flight, in addition to erratic flight trajectories, makes these Morpho very difficult to catch by bird predators (Young, 1971), potentially enhancing their evasive capabilities (Murali and Kodandaramaiah, 2020). Experimental trials with evasive prey have shown that predators learn to avoid prey they repeatedly fail to catch (Páez et al., 2021). The display of iridescent wings could thus be associated with a higher survival rate in nature because of both (i) direct effects, through successful escape of predator attacks, and (ii) indirect effects, by limiting predation attempts by birds recognizing the blue signals and refraining from attacking, as highlighted by butterfly release experiments investigating the hunting behavior of wild insectivorous birds in Brazil (Pinheiro et al., 2016). Mark recapture experiments in the field with manipulated dorsoventral contrasts in wild Morphos have suggested that dynamic flash coloration can reduce predation rate (Vieira‐Silva et al., 2024). This indirect effect could promote the evolution of convergent blue patterns in sympatric species, similar to the mimicry observed in species with chemical defenses (Joron et al., 1999; Merrill et al., 2014). In line with this hypothesis, repeated local convergence in the proportion of iridescent blue vs. black areas on the dorsal side of the wings has been documented in the sister-species Morpho helenor and Morpho achilles living in sympatry throughout the Amazonian basin (Llaurens et al., 2021). Precise quantification of variations in iridescence is now needed to assess the respective effects of selection by predators and mates that may drive convergent vs. divergent evolution of iridescence in sympatric and allopatric ranges.

    First, we quantified iridescence in allopatric vs. sympatric populations of M. helenor subspecies. Since coloration is expected to be more similar within than among species under neutral evolution, we used allopatric populations of M. helenor as a baseline to assess convergence of iridescence between two sympatric species (M. helenor and M. achilles). We then conducted behavioral experiments to test the effect of variation in iridescence on mate recognition, using two subspecies of M. helenor displaying different iridescent phenotypes. This intraspecific comparison allows identifying the visual cues used in mate choice in M. helenor, teasing apart the effects of iridescence and/or wing pattern. We then tested whether those visual cues are used in species recognition between sympatric M. helenor and M. achilles. Finally, we studied variations in the volatile compounds produced by wild males and females from sympatric populations of the two species to explore the evolution of potentially alternative traits, such as chemical cues, possibly acting as a reproductive barrier.

    Continue Reading

  • Amazon sues AI startup over browser’s automated shopping and buying feature | Artificial intelligence (AI)

    Amazon sues AI startup over browser’s automated shopping and buying feature | Artificial intelligence (AI)

    Amazon sued a prominent artificial intelligence startup on Tuesday over a shopping feature in the company’s browser, which can automate placing orders for users. Amazon accused Perplexity AI of covertly accessing customer accounts and disguising AI activity as human browsing.

    “Perplexity’s misconduct must end,” Amazon’s lawyers wrote. “Perplexity is not allowed to go where it has been expressly told it cannot; that Perplexity’s trespass involves code rather than a lockpick makes it no less unlawful.”

    Perplexity, which has grown rapidly amid the boom in AI assistants, has previously rejected the US shopping company’s claims, accusing Amazon of using its market dominance to stifle competition.

    “Bullying is when large corporations use legal threats and intimidation to block innovation and make life worse for people,” the company wrote in a blogpost.

    The clash highlights an emerging debate over regulation of the growing use of AI agents, autonomous digital secretaries powered by AI, and their interaction with websites.

    In the suit, Amazon accused Perplexity of covertly accessing private Amazon customer accounts through its Comet browser and associated AI agent and of disguising automated activity as human browsing. Perplexity’s system posed security risks to customer data, Amazon alleged, and the startup had ignored repeated requests to stop.

    “Rather than be transparent, Perplexity has purposely configured its CometAI software to not identify the Comet AI agent’s activities in the Amazon Store,” it said.

    In the complaint, Amazon accused Perplexity’s Comet AI agent of degrading customers’ shopping experience and interfering with its ability to ensure customers who use the agent benefit from the tailored shopping experience Amazon curated over decades.

    Third-party apps making purchases for users should operate openly and respect businesses’ decisions on whether to participate, Amazon said in an earlier statement.

    Perplexity earlier said it had received a legal threat from Amazon demanding that it block the Comet AI agent from shopping on the platform, calling the move a broader threat to user choice and the future of AI assistants.

    skip past newsletter promotion

    Perplexity is among many AI startups seeking to reorient the web browser around artificial intelligence, aiming to make it more autonomous and capable of handling everyday online activities, from drafting emails to completing purchases.

    Amazon is also developing similar tools, such as “Buy For Me”, which lets users shop across brands within its app, and Rufus, an AI assistant to recommend items and manage carts.

    The AI agent on Perplexity’s Comet browser acts as an assistant that can make purchases and comparisons for users. The startup said user credentials remain stored locally and never on its servers. The startup said users had the right to choose their own AI assistants, portraying Amazon’s move as an attempt to protect its business model.

    “Easier shopping means more transactions and happier customers,” Perplexity added. “But Amazon doesn’t care, they’re more interested in serving you ads.”

    Continue Reading

  • Nearly Four Months After OBBBA, States’ Corporate Tax Conformity Patchwork Continues to Emerge

    By Kathryn Burns and Tom Cornett

    Multistate businesses continue to grapple in many states with uncertain conformity to Internal Revenue Code (IRC) corporate tax provisions following the OBBBA’s (P.L. 119-21, the 2025 federal Act formerly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act) July enactment. Amid lobbying from business interests and the significant state revenue implications of conformity, state responses vary widely.

    For example, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Virginia enacted provisions that proactively decouple from federal IRC amendments in either the current tax year, or the current and immediately succeeding tax years, while Maine granted its governor the authority to temporarily conform to federal IRC amendments contingent on legislative action. Other states, including California and Michigan, updated their IRC tie-in date during the 2025 tax year, while effectively decoupling from the OBBBA’s IRC amendments. Some state governors have asked legislatures to convene special sessions to address OBBBA conformity. Indiana Governor Mike Braun announced a special legislative session to consider conformity that convened this week, and, at the request of Delaware governor Matt Meyer, the Delaware General Assembly is slated to reconvene on November 13, in order to consider decoupling. Meanwhile, the Massachusetts Department of Revenue issued a draft technical information release (TIR) establishing the state’s approach based on pre-existing conformity provisions. Other states have addressed conformity piecemeal, issuing guidance on specific IRC provisions, while many state legislatures and taxing agencies have yet to act.

    For our Checkpoint News series on OBBBA conformity, Checkpoint Catalyst surveys the complexities of the emerging corporate tax compliance landscape and highlights relevant OBBBA state conformity legislation and guidance to date.

    The Labyrinth of Corporate Tax Conformity

    Most states base their corporate income tax calculations on federal taxable income, so that federal tax changes as of a specified date automatically flow through to the state tax base unless the state affirmatively decouples. States with “rolling” IRC conformity automatically adopt federal changes as they occur, while states with “fixed-date” conformity adopt the IRC as it existed on a specific date. Although most states generally conform by using the federal base as a starting point, most also selectively decouple from specific IRC provisions.

    The OBBBA’s enactment mid-year—after many states had established a conformity approach for the tax year—raises unique issues for states and businesses alike. The changes enacted by the law build on provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA), which shifted the U.S. tax system from a worldwide approach to a more territorial-based system, and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) of 2020, which amended TCJA provisions to provide taxpayers temporary relief during the COVID pandemic. Even before the OBBBA, states selectively conformed to or decoupled from parts of the TCJA and CARES Act. The cumulative effect is a labyrinth of rules requiring state modifications to the federally determined base and separate state and federal tracking of depreciation, expense deductions, and various carryforwards.

    States that Proactively or Quickly Decoupled from the OBBBA’s IRC Changes

    Four states—Maine, Maryland, Rhode Island, and Virginia—anticipated federal changes and proactively enacted legislation to address conformity to new law before or immediately after the OBBBA became law. These states’ approaches are as notable for their differences as for their speed of implementation.

    Maine

    Maine, which currently has a general IRC conformity tie-in date of December 31, 2024, [Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. Title 36 § 5295.] took a unique approach by enacting legislation on June 17, 2025, [ME P.L. 2025 c. 336.] authorizing the Governor to temporarily adjust Maine income tax filing requirements when the Commissioner of Administrative and Financial Services determines that the legislature will not have the opportunity to conform or adjust Maine laws before tax returns begin to be processed for the most recently completed tax year. The Commissioner must report in writing to the Governor describing the federal income tax law changes and their potential effect on Maine income tax laws and the state budget. Based on this report, the Governor may direct the State Tax Assessor to temporarily adjust the state’s conformity to some or all of the federal changes, contingent on the Maine legislature’s subsequent enactment of conforming laws.

    In October 2025, Governor Janet Mills issued a conformity determination and directive to the State Tax Assessor addressing the OBBBA provisions for purposes of Maine corporate and individual income tax. [Determination and Direction of the Governor of the State of Maine, Maine Office of the Governor, 10/01/2025; Report on 2025 Conformity with Federal Tax Law Changes, Maine Dep’t. of Admin. and Financial Services, 09/30/2025; Troyer, Maine Provides Guidance Regarding OBBBA Conformity, Checkpoint News, 10/21/2025.] Based on various factors including budgetary impact, Governor Mills directed the State Tax Assessor to conform to various OBBBA provisions (including IRC § 163(j) business interest expense limitations and increased IRC § 179 expensing limits) for purposes of the 2025 tax year. The directive is contingent on subsequent legislative enactment. In the interim, the State Tax Assessor must process 2025 tax year income tax returns, accept payments, and issue refunds in accordance with the Governor’s conformity adjustments. If legislation is not subsequently enacted consistent with the Governor’s directive, taxpayers will be required to file amended tax returns, though they will not be subject to interest or penalty for underpayments related to any variance.

    Maryland

    Maryland’s pre-existing decoupling law requires the Comptroller, within 60 days of the enactment of an amendment to the IRC, to determine the impact changes will have on taxpayers and state revenue. [Md. Code Ann. Tax-Gen. § 10-108(b).] If the Comptroller finds that the impact on state revenue will be $5 million or more in the tax year that begins during the calendar year in which the IRC amendment is enacted, the amendment will not be effective for tax years beginning in the enactment year. [Md. Code Ann. Tax-Gen. § 10-108(a).] Regardless of revenue impact, IRC amendments become effective for tax years beginning in calendar years following the enactment year.

    In September 2025, the Maryland Comptroller issued its analysis determining that the OBBBA amendments to IRC § 174 (research and experimental expenses), IRC § 168(n) (qualified production property depreciation), and IRC § 163(j) (business interest deduction limitation) are expected to have a $5 million or greater impact on Maryland revenues.[Maryland Comptroller Releases Analysis of Federal Tax Changes, Maryland Comptroller, 09/05/2025.] Thus, these IRC amendments will not apply for Maryland tax purposes during the 2025 tax year. Decoupling from any OBBBA provisions in the 2026 and subsequent tax years, however, will require legislative action from the Maryland General Assembly.

    Rhode Island

    Rhode Island enacted decoupling legislation in June 2025. [L. 2025, H5076 (c. 278); Skornicki, Rhode Island Enacts Budget Bill Increasing Several Tax Rates, Expanding Net Income Definition, Setting Various Sunset Dates, Other Provisions, Checkpoint News, 07/28/2025] For tax years beginning on or before January 1, 2025, the law amends the definition of Rhode Island net income to require corporate taxpayers to modify federal taxable income by the amount of any income, deduction, or allowance that would be subject to federal income tax “but for the Congressional enactment of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act or any other similar Congressional enactment.” [R.I. Gen. Laws § 44-11-11(a)(1)(viii).] As a result, for tax years beginning on or before January 1, 2025, Rhode Island does not conform to the amendments enacted by the OBBBA for purposes of calculating a corporation’s taxable net income, but without subsequent legislation or prior decoupling the state will conform for tax years beginning on or after January 2, 2025.

    Virginia

    Virginia’s approach to decoupling is more nuanced. In May 2025, Virginia amended its unique IRC decoupling provisions to provide that the state will not conform to any IRC amendments enacted on or after January 1, 2025, and before January 1, 2027, unless the Virginia legislature subsequently adopts specific IRC amendments or an IRC amendment extends the expiration date of an IRC provision to which Virginia already conforms or has previously conformed. [Va. Code Ann. § 58.1-301(B)(11)(a), as amended by L. 2025, H1600 (c. 725); Helmes, Virginia Budget Extends Pass-Through Entity Tax Election, Increases Standard Deduction, Provides $200 Rebate, Among Other Changes, Checkpoint News, 05/07/2025.] This rule replaces Virginia’s previous threshold-based approach, which provided for nonconformity only when IRC amendments were projected to impact Virginia general fund revenues by more than specified amounts ($15 million for any specific individual amendments or $75 million cumulatively).

    States That Updated Conformity Dates After Enactment of the OBBBA

    Both California and Michigan updated their IRC conformity dates after enactment of the OBBBA, while effectively avoiding conformity to the federal changes.

    California

    In October 2025, after 10 years of conformity to the IRC as in effect on January 1, 2015, the California legislature enacted legislation conforming its corporate and personal income tax laws to the IRC as it existed on January 1, 2025, effective for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025. Because this revised conformity date would have conformed California tax laws to amendments previously enacted by the TCJA and the CARES Act (to which California had not previously conformed), the California law also decoupled from numerous IRC provisions to maintain California’s historic nonconformity to those earlier federal changes. [Cal. Rev. & Tax. Cd. § 17024.5(a)(1)(Q); Cal. Rev. & Tax. Cd. § 23051.5(a)(1).] The revised conformity date ensures nonconformity to the OBBBA provisions, which were enacted after January 1, 2025.

    Michigan

    Michigan amended its IRC conformity date for both corporate and individual income tax purposes to the IRC as of January 1, 2025, or, at the taxpayer’s option, the IRC in effect for the tax year. Because most taxpayers elect to conform to the IRC as in effect for the tax year, changes resulting from the OBBBA (effective January 1, 2025) are generally applicable for Michigan corporate and individual income tax purposes. However, for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, the enacted Michigan legislation includes various decoupling provisions requiring taxpayers to modify the computation specified in certain IRC provisions, including IRC § 168(k) (bonus depreciation), IRC § 179 (expensing), and IRC § 163(j) (business interest expense limitations). The Michigan Department of Treasury also advised taxpayers that due to the shifting legal landscape and the OBBBA’s changes to the federal state and local tax deduction limits, the state will provide limited relief to flow-through entities that made their first binding election to pay tax at the entity level prior to the enactment of the OBBBA. These flow-through entities can invalidate the election by requesting a refund of the taxes paid to make the election, provided their annual flow-through entity tax return has not been filed. [Notice Regarding Flow-Through Entity Tax Election Relief in Light of Pub. L. 119-21, One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OB3), Michigan Department of Treasury, 09/23/2025 [last updated].]

    States That Updated Their General Conformity Dates in 2025 Before Enactment of the OBBBA

    Ten states (Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, and West Virginia) updated their general IRC conformity dates in 2025 before enactment of the 2025 Act. With the exception of Florida, and without future legislation, all of these states are decoupled from the OBBBA amendments because their adopted conformity dates predate enactment of the OBBBA.

    STATES UPDATING IRC CONFORMITY BEFORE OBBBA ENACTMENT THAT EFFECTIVELY DECOUPLE

    • Arizona – For tax years beginning after December 31, 2024, conforms to Internal Revenue Code in effect on January 1, 2025, excluding changes enacted after January 1, 2025 [Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 42-1001(8), as amended by L. 2025, H2688; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 43-105(A).]
    • Georgia – For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, conforms to the IRC as of December 31, 2024 [Ga. Code Ann. § 48-1-2(14), as amended by L. 2025, H290.]
    • Hawaii – For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, conforms to the IRC as of December 31, 2024 [Haw. Rev. Stat. § 235-2.3(a), as amended by L. 2025, S1464 (Act 123).]
    • Idaho – Effective January 1, 2025, conforms to the IRC as in effect on January 1, 2025, and does not incorporate the OBBBA amendments [Idaho Code § 63-3004, as amended by L. 2025, H1, effective 01/01/2025.]
    • Kentucky – Effective June 27, 2025, and applicable to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, conforms to the IRC in effect on December 31, 2024, and does not conform to the OBBBA amendments. [KY. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 141.010(21); L. 2025, HB775, §30.]
    • South Carolina – Effective May 22, 2025, conforms to the IRC as amended through December 31, 2024 (including sections that expired on December 31, 2024, but were not otherwise amended during 2025), and does not conform to the OBBBA amendments. [S.C. Code Ann. § 12-6-40(A)(1), L. 2025, Act 63, §1.]
    • South Dakota – Effective February 18, 2025, for purposes of the banks and financial institutions tax, conforms to the IRC as in effect on January 1, 2025 [S.D. Codified Laws §10-1-47, as amended by L. 2025, HB1028 §1.]
    • Vermont – Enacted on May 21, 2025, retroactively effective to January 1, 2025, and applicable to tax years beginning on and after January 1, 2024, conforms to the Internal Revenue Code in effect on December 31, 2024 [Vt. Stat. Ann. Title 21 §5824. as amended by L. 2025, H493, § E.111.]
    • West Virginia – Effective February 17, 2025, and retroactively applicable to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2025, conforms to the Internal Revenue Code as amended through December 31, 2024 [W. Va. Code §11-24-3(a), as amended by WV L. 2025, c. 2.]

    Florida

    Florida amended its IRC conformity provisions in June 2025, retroactively applicable to January 1, 2025, to conform to the IRC as amended and in effect on January 1, 2025, with the exception that any future amendment to the IRC must be given effect for Florida tax purposes in the manner and for the periods prescribed in the IRC, to the extent that the amended provision of the IRC is taken into account in the computation of taxable net income. [Fla. Stat. § 220.03(1)(n), as amended by FL L. 2025, c. 25-208, §§60, 62; Fla. Stat. § 220.03(3).] Florida has historically updated its fixed date conformity to the current tax year to generally conform to federal amendments but selectively decouples from various provisions. [Fla. Stat. § 220.03(1)(n), as amended by FL L. 2025, c. 25-208, §§60, 62; Fla. Stat. § 220.03(3); Fla. Stat. § 220.13.] Taxpayers should monitor Florida legislative action with respect to the OBBBA provisions.

    However, in response to an inquiry from Checkpoint Catalyst, a Florida Department of Revenue representative observed that although Florida has “adopted the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2025,” Florida law “does not address the OBBBA, which became effective after the 2025 Florida legislative session ended. The Florida Legislature will have the opportunity to consider the OBBBA amendments to the Internal Revenue Code during the next legislative session, which is scheduled to begin January 13, 2026.” [Email from Florida Department of Revenue to Checkpoint Catalyst, on file with Checkpoint Catalyst, 11/04/2025.]

    States That Have Issued Guidance Following the OBBBA

    Massachusetts summary

    The Massachusetts Department of Revenue issued a draft technical information release (TIR) listing 52 of the OBBBA’s provisions that the Department determined to principally affect federal gross income or federal deductions and, because Massachusetts’s IRC conformity provisions under the individual income tax and the corporate excise tax differ, the draft TIR indicates separately for income tax and corporate excise tax purposes whether the state conforms to those provisions. [Technical Information Release Working Draft TIR: Massachusetts Tax Conformity to Certain Provisions in Public Law No. 119-21, Massachusetts Department of Revenue, 10/20/2025; Nosce, Massachusetts Issues Draft Conformity to OBBBA Provisions, Checkpoint News, 10/27/2025.] Although Massachusetts conforms to many of the OBBBA provisions for corporate tax purposes, the state does decouple from other provisions based on the state’s pre-existing conformity scheme, which is tied to the IRC as currently in effect for the 2025 tax year. The Department is likely to provide further guidance in the final version of the release.

    Other states may choose to address conformity to specific sections of the Internal Revenue Code as amended by the OBBBA. For example, in September 2025, the Alabama Department of Revenue issued guidance reaffirming its nonconformity to TCJA amendments to IRC §174 for expenditures incurred on or after January 1, 2024. [Research and Experimental Expenditures, Alabama Department of Revenue Notice, 09/11/2025; Del Bene, Alabama Issues Guidance on Research/Experimental Expenditures Following Enactment of OBBBAA, Checkpoint News, 09/16/2025.]

    States Lacking Explicit Guidance After the OBBBA

    Many major states, such as Illinois and New York, have yet to explicitly address their approach to the OBBBA’s IRC amendments. To some degree, existing law dictates a clear outcome. For example, Illinois decouples from the bonus depreciation provisions of IRC § 163(k) for tax years ending on or after December 31, 2021, [ILCS Chapter 35 § 5/203(b)(2)(T)(3)(iii)] and also decouples from IRC § 168(k). [N.Y. Tax Law § 208(9)(b)(17).] However, the OBBBA amendments raise unique questions and issues that these states will need to grapple with in the months and years to come.

    Implications for Taxpayers and Practitioners

    The divergent state approaches to IRC conformity and the varied methods by which state tax agencies issue guidance on OBBBA amendments create significant challenges for taxpayers attempting to monitor changes and engage in proactive tax planning.

    In navigating this multistate compliance complexity, key considerations for corporate taxpayers include:

    Tracking Requirements: Taxpayers will need to maintain separate depreciation schedules, expense deduction calculations, and business interest expense limitation computations for federal and various state purposes, adding to the existing complexity created by state conformity variations related to the TCJA and CARES Act.

    Estimated Tax Payments: Taxpayers should carefully evaluate their state estimated tax obligations in light of potential differences between federal and state taxable income calculations resulting from conformity variations.

    Planning Opportunities: Taxpayers with operations in multiple states should be alert for planning opportunities generated by the emerging conformity patchwork, including considerations around asset placement and timing of deductions.

    Documentation: Taxpayers should maintain detailed documentation supporting their conformity positions, particularly in states like Maine where temporary administrative guidance may not ultimately be codified legislatively.

    As states continue to grapple with the revenue implications of the 2025 Act, additional guidance and legislative action should be expected. Tax professionals should remain vigilant in tracking state-level developments and advising clients on the compliance and planning implications of this latest round of federal tax reform.

    Checkpoint resources. Checkpoint Catalyst breaks down the nuances of each state’s approach to conformity in the following topics:

    Catalyst Topic # 305:1000 State Treatment of the Limitation on Deduction of Business Interest Under IRC § 163(j)

    Catalyst Topic # 402:1000 State Tax Treatment of Depreciation

    Catalyst Topic # 403:1000 State Treatment of Expensing and Bonus Depreciation

    Catalyst Topic # 1003:050 State IRC Conformity

    Several State Charts briefly capture each state’s approach to the relevant OBBBA amendments:

    • State Follows IRC § 163(j)—The 2025 Act (OBBB)
    • State Follows IRC § 174A—The 2025 Act (OBBB)
    • SALT Deduction Cap Workaround
    • State Follows Bonus Depreciation—The 2025 Act (OBBB)
    • State Follows Bonus Depreciation—The 2025 Act (OBBB)
    • State Follows IRC § 179— The 2025 Act (OBBB)
    • State Follows IRC § 179— The 2025 Act (OBBB)

     

    Take your tax and accounting research to the next level with Checkpoint Edge and CoCounsel. Get instant access to AI-assisted research, expert-approved answers, and cutting-edge tools like Advisory Maps and State Charts. Try it today and transform the way you work! Subscribe now and discover a smarter way to find answers.

    Continue Reading

  • Kirkland Advises Carlyle on DPLTA with SNP | News

    Following Carlyle’s voluntary public takeover offer for SNP, Kirkland & Ellis advised Carlyle on entering into a domination and profit and loss transfer agreement (DPLTA) to establish control of SNP Schneider-Neureither & Partner SE (SNP). The DPLTA will become effective on January 1, 2026.

    SNP, headquartered in Heidelberg, is a global technology platform leader and trusted partner for companies seeking data-enabled transformation capabilities and business agility. The company works with more than 3,000 customers of all sizes and in all industries in 80 countries and has around 1,600 employees worldwide.

    Kirkland & Ellis also advised Carlyle on the voluntary public takeover offer for all outstanding shares of SNP, which was completed in April 2025.

    The Kirkland team included corporate lawyers Achim Herfs, Thomas Hornberger, Florian Sippel and Sabrina Seitz.

    Continue Reading