Paramount Sued by Subscribers Over $110B Warner Bros. Deal
Get the Culture newsletter
Daily culture — film, music, books, the trends and ideas worth your attention. Free.
- Five streaming subscribers — three current Paramount+ users and two prospective ones — filed suit Thursday in San Jose federal court seeking an injunction against the $110 billion merger plus triple damages under the Clayton Act.
- Plaintiffs Pamela Faust, Len Marazzo, Lisa McCarthy, Deborah Rubinsohn, and Gary Talewsky allege the transaction reflects a strategy of consolidation that "eliminates independent rivals" and will raise prices while narrowing viewing options for subscribers and moviegoers alike.
- The complaint goes further than blocking the Warner Bros. deal, asking the court to force Skydance to divest Paramount — the company it acquired last year — as part of the same remedy.
- The lawsuit alleges Skydance "curried favor" with the Trump administration by agreeing to "align CBS News's editorial posture" with the White House, claiming the concession reduced "editorial independence and investigative vigor."
- The Disney-Fox deal and Amazon-MGM merger are cited in the suit as proof of "successive combinations toward fewer independent rivals" that justify blocking the next consolidation.
- Paramount Skydance CEO David Ellison has pledged to release at least 30 films a year once the Warner Bros. deal closes and increase theatrical output, while the company dismissed the lawsuit as "without merit."
Why it matters: Private antitrust claims rarely prevail, but the suit adds a second legal front on top of the more likely coalition-of-states challenge, with Paramount targeting a Q3 close. By tying the merger to alleged editorial concessions at CBS News, the plaintiffs inject a political dimension that could complicate regulatory review beyond the standard price-and-output antitrust case.
