DIVERGE
DIGITIAL
Where law meets innovation.
OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF DIVERGE LEGAL
the blog
The $108B Standoff: Why Warner Bros. Picked Netflix Over Paramount (Part III)
Warner Bros. Discovery has told shareholders to reject Paramount Skydance’s USD 108.4B hostile takeover and stick with its binding Netflix deal. This Part 3 update breaks down the board’s reasoning, the brewing fiduciary‑duty and antitrust fights, and the practical contract moves creators should make as Netflix, WBD, and Paramount battle for control of Hollywood’s most valuable IP.
Hostile Takeover: The $108 Billion War for Warner Bros. (Part II)
The $82.7 billion Netflix-WBD deal is no longer a definitive agreement. Paramount Skydance has launched a hostile tender offer for the entire company at $30.00 per share in all-cash, dramatically escalating the auction to an enterprise value of $108.4 billion. This aggressive maneuver immediately places the WBD Board in a fiduciary trap. Under M&A principles (such as the Revlon standard), the Board's duty shifts to maximizing shareholder value, forcing them to justify why the lower, stock-component Netflix offer is superior to a higher, all-cash bid. The decision hinges not only on price but on opposing antitrust...
The $82.7 Billion Question – Should the Netflix-Warner Bros. Deal Be Blocked? (Part I)
The Netflix acquisition of Warner Bros.'s film and TV studios, including HBO and HBO Max, for an estimated $82.7 billion is not merely a corporate transaction; it's a structural shift that concentrates unprecedented power and IP under one roof. This deal eliminates a major buyer for new content, leading to market consolidation that directly impacts every creator's ability to negotiate favourable terms, compensation, and ownership. The size of this transaction immediately triggered intense scrutiny under anti-trust and competition law globally, with major…
Will AI Replace Lawyers? What Creators Really Risk with AI Contract Review
It’s impossible to ignore the headlines proclaiming that the legal profession is under threat from Artificial Intelligence. The narrative is compelling: sophisticated AI will soon be able to analyze cases, draft flawless documents, and provide legal help at a fraction of the cost, leading to a future where clients prefer a chatbot to a boardroom. For creators accustomed to the fast pace of technological change…
Disclaimer
Diverge Legal by Kicz Legal Professional Corporation (“Diverge Legal” or the “Company”) takes reasonable care to make sure that the information on Diverge Digital (the “blog”) is complete at the time it was posted. However, the information may not be comprehensive or current and is provided for general information purposes only and should not be relied upon for legal advice. You should consult a qualified lawyer on any specific legal question or matter.
Diverge Legal is not responsible and all liability is excluded for any damage or loss due to any reliance upon the information on this blog. Use of the information on this blog is at your own risk.
Links from this blog are provided for convenience, and do not suggest an affiliation with or endorsement by the author or the Company. Diverge Legal is not responsible for the content of external sites that link to this blog or that are linked from this blog.
This blog is for informational purposes only. The content is not legal advice and no lawyer-client relationship is created by accessing or otherwise using this blog or by communicating with the author by email or through this blog. Neither the Company nor the author of the blog guarantee the confidentiality of any communication via email or through this blog.