topics

politics-policy

epstein-files

donald-trump

2026-midterm-elections

immigration

behind-the-curtain

race-and-equity

technology

privacy-tech-regulation

automation-and-ai

tiktok-news

big-tech

social-media

cybersecurity

economy

social-security

inflation

tariffs

federal-reserve

jobs

transportation

business

stock-market-news

retail-news

crypto

media

elon-musk

dealmaking

health

rfk-jr

drug-prices

axios-explains-abortion

public-health

world

israel

axios-explains-ukraine

iran

russia

china

energy-climate

nuclear-energy

climate-energy-policy

climate-change

extreme-weather

alternative-energy

electric-vehicles

science

emerging-tech

biomedicine

newsletters

pittsburgh

atlanta

san-diego

charlotte

boulder

washington-dc

kansas-city

dallas

denver

detroit

des-moines

austin

boston

chicago

cleveland

columbus

houston

indianapolis

miami

nashville

new-orleans

nw-arkansas

philadelphia

phoenix

portland

richmond

salt-lake-city

san-antonio

san-francisco

seattle

tampa-bay

twin-cities

raleigh

huntsville

colorado-springs

axios-local

axios-pro

axios-live

the-axios-show

National

Apple won a temporary pause Wednesday on the U.S. International Trade Commission's decision to ban sales of Watch Series 9 and Watch Ultra 2 models in the United States.

Why it matters: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's interim order prompted Apple to announce that it would resume selling the wearables in stores around the country on Wednesday and online from 3pm Thursday ET as the tech giant continues to appeal the ban.

Apple is the world's largest smartwatch seller, with its Apple Watch devices accounting for nearly a third of all smartwatch purchases across the globe last year, per Counterpoint Research.

Driving the news: Apple filed an emergency appeal Tuesday against the USITC's decision that it had infringed two patents owned by Masimo Corporation and Cercacor Laboratories, which the commission said became final on Dec. 26.

The tech giant suspended U.S. sales of the two impacted Apple Watches before the order took effect, pulling them from its website on Dec. 21 and from store shelves on Dec. 24. 

Other retailers may still sell the smartwatches, though stock will not be replenished until a ruling is made in the patent case as Apple cannot currently import the two watch models to the U.S.

Context: In October, the USITC ruled in favor of Masimo, a medical device company that also produces fitness-tracking smartwatches. The company claimed that Apple's blood oxygen sensor included with some watch models infringed Masimo's intellectual property.

What we're watching: The exclusion order enforcement branch of U.S. Customs and Border Protection is due to decide on Jan. 12 whether Apple's proposed redesigns of the affected watches infringe on Masimo's patents, as noted in Apple's appeal filing.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is considering Apple's request to stay the order during its appeal.

The company expects the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to hear its motion as soon as Jan. 15 for a stay for the entire period during which it is appealing the case. 

What they're saying: "We are thrilled to return the full Apple Watch lineup to customers in time for the new year," Apple said in a statement Wednesday.

"Apple's teams have worked tirelessly over many years to develop technology that empowers users with industry-leading health, wellness and safety features and we are pleased the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has stayed the exclusion order while it considers our request to stay the order pending our full appeal."

Representatives for the USITC and Masimo declined to comment.

Editor's note: This article has been updated with comment from Apple. Shauneen Miranda contributed reporting.

Apple resuming watch sales in U.S. after court pauses ban

Apple said it's resuming selling the watches in stores around the U.S. and online from tomorrow.

Apple watches are seen on display at the Apple Store in Grand Central Station on December 18, 2023 in New York City. 

Apple watches on display at the Apple Store in Grand Central Station, in New York City, earlier this month. Photo: Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

Apple Watch

Business

From the Valley to D.C., Big Tech players like Facebook, Google and Amazon are under more scrutiny than ever as new technology develops and privacy and antitrust concerns grow in lockstep with companies’ ambitions.

Technology

Media Trends

Axios Media Trends

The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft for copyright infringement.

Why it matters: The Times is the first major media company to sue artificial intelligence companies for copyright infringement.

The forthcoming legal battle could set a precedent for how courts define the value of news content in training large language models, and what the damages are for previous use.

The other side: "We respect the rights of content creators and owners and are committed to working with them to ensure they benefit from AI technology and new revenue models," an OpenAI spokesperson told Axios in a statement.

 "Our ongoing conversations with the New York Times have been productive and moving forward constructively, so we are surprised and disappointed with this development. We're hopeful that we will find a mutually beneficial way to work together, as we are doing with many other publishers."

Context: Other firms, such as German media giant Axel Springer and the Associated Press, have started to broker deals individually with artificial intelligence firms.

Those arrangements include payments to news companies in exchange for the right to use their content to train AI large language models.

Other sorts of copyright holders — including major music companies, authors and comedians — have also sued generative AI companies on similar grounds.

Details: The complaint filed Wednesday in the Southern District of New York alleges that OpenAI and Microsoft's "unlawful use of The Times's work to create artificial intelligence products that compete with it threatens The Times's ability to provide that service."

The Times argues that while those firms "engaged in widescale copying from many sources," they placed "particular emphasis" on the Times’ content.

"Defendants seek to free-ride on The Times's massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive products without permission or payment," the lawsuit says.

How it works: The Times conducted an analysis of the latest available set of data on web crawlers used by AI companies to train their algorithms, according to the lawsuit.

It inferred from that data that its content was likely used more than other widely available sets of content online to train AI large language models.

Be smart: The Times has not demanded a specific amount of damages, but in the lawsuit says it "seeks to hold them responsible for the billions of dollars in statutory and actual damages."

The big picture: The lawsuit marks a major turning point in the already contentious relationship between Big Tech firms and news companies.

News publishers have spent the last decade lobbying Congress for protections from Big Tech firms that leveraged their content for social media and search engine engagement. 

The advent of AI has launched a new lobbying effort among news executives who argue tech firms don't have the right to scrape their content under the fair use parameters of current copyright law. 

Some news advocates fear that without proper guardrails, artificial intelligence companies could jeopardize the businesses of the news companies they are relying on to train their algorithms, creating an existential threat for both AI companies and newsrooms alike long-term. 

The intrigue: Part of what makes the legal battle between news publishers and AI firms so complicated is that news companies still want to experiment with the new tech, even while fighting AI companies for protections.

The Times, for example, hired an editorial director of artificial intelligence initiatives two weeks ago. 

Microsoft did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

Go deeper: The big risk behind the AI investment boom

NYT_OpenAI

Editor's note: This story has been updated with additional context, details from the lawsuit and comment from OpenAI.

The big risk behind the AI investment boom

NYT sues OpenAI, Microsoft for copyright infringement

The NYT is the first major media company to sue artificial intelligence companies for copyright infringement.

The New York Times building on April 29 in New York City. Photo: Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

The New York Times

U.S. forces in the Middle East destroyed a swarm of drones and missiles fired by the Iran-backed Houthi rebels during an hours-long attack in the Red Sea on Tuesday, U.S. Central Command said.

Why it matters: A surge of Houthi attacks in recent weeks has disrupted international shipping, and prompted the U.S. to step up its military presence in the region.

The confrontation came just little over a week after the U.S. expanded a multinational maritime security force to protect ships in the Red Sea from attacks launched by the Houthis.

The Houthis say they are conducting the attacks in solidarity with the Palestinians. Prior to Tuesday's attempted missile and drone strikes, the group had vowed to continue its attacks despite the expanded U.S.-led security force.

Shipping giants including Maersk had rerouted ships away from critical shipping channels in the Red Sea due to the Houthi attacks. Maersk announced Sunday that it would be resuming those shipments.

The big picture: Iran-aligned groups across the Middle East have stepped up their attacks on Israel and on U.S. forces in the region during the Israel-Hamas war.

Tuesday's Houthi attack came a day after other Iranian-backed groups launched a drone attack against Erbil air base in Iraq, injuring three American service members.

In response to that attack and others, the U.S. destroyed three facilities used by Iranian proxies through a round of airstrikes on Tuesday, according to CENTCOM.

What they're saying: President Biden said in a letter to Congress on Wednesday that the strikes were intended to disrupt ongoing attacks as well as to "deter Iran and Iran-backed militia groups from conducting or supporting further attacks on United States personnel and facilities."

He warned in the letter that the U.S. "stands ready to take further action, as necessary and appropriate, to address further threats or attacks."

Driving the news: U.S. Central Command said U.S. fighter jets and a warship shot down a dozen suicide drones, three anti-ship ballistic missiles and two cruise missiles over a 10-hour period on Tuesday.

They were downed by the USS Laboon and F/A-18 Super Hornets from the Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group.

CENTCOM added that there was no damage to ships in the area or reported injuries.

Go deeper: Mapped: Houthi shipping vessel attacks around the Red Sea

Editor's note: This story has been updated to include a letter from President Biden.

Mapped: Houthi shipping vessel attacks around the Red Sea

U.S. forces destroy swarm of drones and missiles launched by Houthis

A dozen suicide drones, three anti-ship ballistic missiles and two cruise missiles were shot down.

The USS Laboon passing through the Bosphorus in Istanbul, Turkey in June 2021.

The USS Laboon passing through the Bosphorus in Istanbul, Turkey in June 2021. Photo: Muhammed Gencebay Gur/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

Yemen

Conflicts, policies and powers are intersecting and shaping the world. Breaking news and analysis of national security, foreign policy and global crises.

World

The NBA approved on Wednesday billionaire Mark Cuban's majority stake sale in the Dallas Mavericks to the families that run a Las Vegas casino company. 

Why it matters: The deal, estimated at around $3.5 billion, allows Cuban to retain oversight of the team's basketball operations and could enable the family to build a new arena and push for legal gambling in the state, per Axios Dallas. 

Details: The NBA said in a statement on Wednesday that the families of Miriam Adelson and Sivan and Patrick Dumont, who run the Las Vegas Sands casino company, will now have controlling interest in the Mavericks. 

Patrick Dumont will now serve as the governor of the Mavericks, the NBA announced. 

Context: Adelson is the widow of casino magnate Sheldon Adelson and her son-in-law Patrick Dumont is the chief operating officer and president of the Las Vegas Sands.

Go deeper: Las Vegas Sands' business case for a stake in the Dallas Mavericks

Las Vegas Sands' business case for a stake in the Dallas Mavericks

NBA approves Dallas Mavericks sale to Las Vegas casino families

Mark Cuban's majority stake sale of Dallas Mavericks approved by NBA

The deal is estimated at around $3.5 billion.

Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban reacts after a basket during the second half against the Utah Jazz at American Airlines Center on December 06, 2023 in Dallas, Texas. 

Mark Cuban during the Dallas Mavericks' game against the Utah Jazz in Dallas, Texas, earlier this month. Photo: Sam Hodde/Getty Images

Mark Cuban

Shifts in technology and media are changing the way we play, watch and understand sports. Business models are adapting and social change is forcing those in charge of teams and leagues to reconsider decades-old practices.

Sports

Michigan's Supreme Court rejected an attempt to keep former President Trump off the 2024 primary ballot Wednesday, upholding a lower court ruling.

Why it matters: The decision in a battleground state contrasts with a recent Colorado ruling that removed Trump from the state's ballot.

In both cases, Trump's removal from the ballot was sought via a section of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment, also known as the "insurrectionist ban." 

The clause prohibits anyone who swore an oath to the U.S. and then "engaged in insurrection" against the country from holding public office.

The clause was used against ex-Confederates following the Civil War, and has only been used once since 1919, but never to a presidential candidate.

Details: Colorado and Michigan election laws differ, the opinion said. 

No provision in Michigan Election Law requires someone seeking the presidency "to attest to their legal qualification to hold the office," the court said. 

The ruling reflects those from lower courts, both of which said that Michigan's court system had no place in deciding if a candidate qualified for a ballot. 

"At the moment, the only event about to occur is the presidential primary election. But as explained, whether Trump is disqualified is irrelevant to his placement on that particular ballot," the panel of three Michigan Court of Appeals judges for the case wrote in their ruling. 

The Michigan Supreme Court opinion was not signed by any of the judges, and the court did not release a vote count.

Zoom out: The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hear whether Trump can be on Colorado's primary ballot. 

Lawsuits regarding Trump's ballot eligibility have been filed in state courts in Oregon, New Jersey and Wisconsin as well as federal district courts in Alaska, Arizona, Nevada, New York, New Mexico, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming. 

Axios

Wednesday's top stories

Apple resuming watch sales in U.S. after court pauses ban

NYT sues OpenAI, Microsoft for copyright infringement

U.S. forces destroy swarm of drones and missiles launched by Houthis

NBA approves Dallas Mavericks sale to Las Vegas casino families

Michigan Supreme Court rejects bid to remove Trump from 2024 primary ballot

Thousands — and some city officials — want Trump's Hollywood star removed

Blinken expected to visit Middle East next week for talks on Gaza war

Mapped: U.S. public pensions have a lot of investments in China

Exclusive data: Trump lowers his own social media punch

2024: The year AI gets real

Trump shares word cloud on "revenge" and "dictatorship"