Amazon agrees to pay D.C. $3.95 million over stolen driver tips
Amazon settled a lawsuit with D.C. over stolen tips on Friday, with the e-commerce behemoth agreeing to pay $3.95 million to the District, including $2.4 million in penalties.
The ligation, filed in 2022 by then-D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine, was related to Amazon Flex, a quick-delivery program launched in 2015. According to the Federal Trade Commission, Amazon misled customers between late 2016 and August 2019 over its tip policy. The company encouraged customers to tip drivers and assured them 100 percent of those tips went to the driver, according to the lawsuit.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Amazon Eyes AI-Powered Humanoid Robots for Last-Mile Edge
Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN) stock popped about 2.7% yesterday after word got out that the e-commerce giant is quietly building a humanoid park in San Francisco to experiment with AI-powered robots for deliveries. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 2 Warning Sign with AMZN. Instead of relying solely on its 750,000 warehouse bots, Amazon is now eyeing humanoid prototypessome coming from China's Unitreethat can literally hop out of a Rivian (RIVN) delivery van to drop packages at your doorstep. Right now, engineers are fine-tuning navigation, object handling and safety systems in a mock urban environment, complete with a single Rivian van parked among obstacles. Meanwhile, over at Amazon's Lab126 in Sunnyvale, a fresh agentic AI team is working on getting these robots to understand and act on natural language commandsimagine telling a bot, Pick up that package and leave it by the back door and having it do just that. All of this is part of Amazon's broader push to shave billions off its fulfillment and delivery bills (which topped $60 billion last year) and stay a step ahead of rivals like Walmart (NYSE:WMT) and FedEx (NYSE:FDX). While timelines are still fuzzy, CEO Andy Jassy hinted that pilot tests could roll out in select cities later this year. Investors should care because if these humanoid bots make it from test park to real-world routes, Amazon could cut costs, boost delivery speeds and create a new benchmark in last-mile logistics. This article first appeared on GuruFocus.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Value Meets Growth: 3 Artificial Intelligence (AI) Stocks Even Warren Buffett Might Respect
One prominent search and artificial intelligence (AI) giant trades at a rock-bottom valuation. This social media company could leverage its data horde to become an AI leader. Amid customer and geopolitical concerns, one semiconductor stock has arguably become oversold. 10 stocks we like better than Alphabet › Investors often view value stocks and growth stocks as mutually exclusive. This is likely because growth stocks often trade at premium valuations, and value stocks tend to attract conservative investors, or those focused on income more than growth. That essentially describes investors like Warren Buffett. However, Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway includes stocks such as Amazon and T-Mobile that arguably tend more toward growth than value. Knowing that, one can identify artificial intelligence (AI)-oriented value stocks that might draw an investor like Buffett. These names are three examples. Amid Buffett's bent toward technology investors in recent years, Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOGL) (NASDAQ: GOOG) looks like a stock that could fit Berkshire's portfolio. Alphabet is a longtime leader in the AI field, and that technology helped the company cement its leadership in search, a business that has consistently generated massive free cash flows through its leadership in digital advertising. Nonetheless, it still derives 74% of its revenue from ads, and the rise of ChatGPT has raised questions about Alphabet's business model. With its market share in search now below 90%, it is under pressure to turn to other income sources. Fortunately, it has done just that, deriving 14% of its revenue from Google Cloud. Also, its $45 billion autonomous driving company Waymo also holds the potential to pick up some of the slack. To stay competitive, Alphabet pledged to spend $75 billion in capital expenditures (capex) this year. The company holds around $95 billion in liquidity, and it generated $75 billion in free cash flow over the trailing 12 months, a figure that does not include the capex spending. That investment makes it likely the Google parent will stay competitive. When also considering the P/E ratio of about 19, value investors have tremendous incentive to bet on an AI-driven comeback. Most investors likely know Facebook parent Meta Platforms (NASDAQ: META) better as a social media stock than an AI leader. One can understand that, given the 3.4 billion people that log on to a Meta-owned social media site every day. That amounts to 42% of the population, a figure that implies it is closing in on market saturation. With the amount of data generated by its users, Meta sees its future in the metaverse and AI. To that end, it has begun to invest heavily in technology and data centers, pledging to spend between $64 billion and $72 billion in 2025 in capex to build its infrastructure. Despite that staggering sum, it can likely afford to make this investment. Meta holds more than $70 billion in liquidity, and it generated $50 billion over the trailing 12 months. Additionally, its P/E ratio is just around 27. When considering that reasonable valuation, its massive potential for AI leadership, and ability to generate cash, Meta is a growth stock priced to drive value-oriented investors. Another surprising value stock is Qualcomm (NASDAQ: QCOM). The AI chip designer has long led the development of smartphone chipsets, but heavy exposure to China and Apple's plan to develop chipsets in-house have soured many investors on Qualcomm stock. However, investors have good reason to bet on an AI-driven recovery. Qualcomm has diversified into IoT, automotive, PC chips, and data center processors as it prepares for softer smartphone demand. Admittedly, it is not investing as heavily as some tech giants in capex, spending just $1.1 billion over the previous 12 months. Nonetheless, with the DeepSeek breakthrough making low-cost AI more feasible, an AI-driven upgrade cycle could breathe new life into its smartphone business, increasing that segment's 12% annual revenue growth rate. Moreover, its IoT and automotive segments grew revenue at a yearly rate of 27% and 59%, respectively, helping Qualcomm diversify its revenue base more rapidly. Additionally, amid the impending loss of Apple and its China ties, Qualcomm trades at a 15 P/E ratio. That's far below any of the major chip design companies, and with its potential to support AI smartphones and other products, that valuation arguably makes this semiconductor stock too cheap to ignore. Before you buy stock in Alphabet, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Alphabet wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $669,517!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $868,615!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 792% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 171% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Will Healy has positions in Berkshire Hathaway and Qualcomm. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Berkshire Hathaway, Meta Platforms, and Qualcomm. The Motley Fool recommends T-Mobile US. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Value Meets Growth: 3 Artificial Intelligence (AI) Stocks Even Warren Buffett Might Respect was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Hamilton Spectator
2 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Global streamers fight CRTC's rule requiring them to fund Canadian content
OTTAWA - Some of the world's biggest streaming companies will argue in court on Monday that they shouldn't have to make CRTC-ordered financial contributions to Canadian content and news. The companies are fighting an order from the federal broadcast regulator that says they must pay five per cent of their annual Canadian revenues to funds devoted to producing Canadian content, including local TV news. The case, which consolidates several appeals by streamers, will be heard by the Federal Court of Appeal in Toronto. Apple, Amazon and Spotify are fighting the CRTC's 2024 order. Motion Picture Association-Canada, which represents such companies as Netflix and Paramount, is challenging a section of the CRTC's order requiring them to contribute to local news. In December, the court put a pause on the payments — estimated to be at least $1.25 million annually per company. Amazon, Apple and Spotify had argued that if they made the payments and then won the appeal and overturned the CRTC order, they wouldn't be able to recover the money. In court documents, the streamers put forward a long list of arguments on why they shouldn't have to pay, including technical points regarding the CRTC's powers under the Broadcasting Act. Spotify argued that the contribution requirement amounts to a tax, which the CRTC doesn't have the authority to impose. The music streamer also took issue with the CRTC requiring the payments without first deciding how it will define Canadian content. Amazon argued the federal cabinet specified the CRTC's requirements have to be 'equitable.' It said the contribution requirement is 'inequitable because it applies only to foreign online undertakings and only to such undertakings with more than $25 million in annual Canadian broadcasting revenues.' Apple also said the regulator 'acted prematurely' and argued the CRTC didn't consider whether the order was 'equitable.' It pointed out Apple is required to contribute five per cent, while radio stations must only pay 0.5 per cent — and streamers don't have the same access to the funds into which they pay. The CRTC imposes different rules on Canadian content contributions from traditional media players. It requires large English-language broadcasters to contribute 30 per cent of revenues to Canadian programming. Motion Picture Association—Canada is only challenging one aspect of the CRTC's order — the part requiring companies to contribute 1.5 per cent of revenues to a fund for local news on independent TV stations. It said in court documents that none of the streamers 'has any connection to news production' and argued the CRTC doesn't have the authority to require them to fund news. 'What the CRTC did, erroneously, is purport to justify the … contribution simply on the basis that local news is important and local news operations provided by independent television stations are short of money,' it said. 'That is a reason why news should be funded by someone, but is devoid of any analysis, legal or factual, as to why it is equitable for foreign online undertakings to fund Canadian news production.' In its response, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters said the CRTC has wide authority under the Broadcasting Act. It argued streamers have contributed to the funding crisis facing local news. 'While the industry was once dominated by traditional television and radio services, those services are now in decline, as Canadians increasingly turn to online streaming services,' the broadcasters said. 'For decades, traditional broadcasting undertakings have supported the production of Canadian content through a complex array of CRTC-directed measures … By contrast, online undertakings have not been required to provide any financial support to the Canadian broadcasting system, despite operating here for well over a decade.' A submission from the federal government in defence of the CRTC argued the regulator was within its rights to order the payments. 'The orders challenged in these proceedings … are a valid exercise of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission's regulatory powers. These orders seek to remedy the inequity that has resulted from the ascendance of online streaming giants like the Appellants,' the office of the attorney general said. 'Online undertakings have greatly profited from their access to Canadian audiences, without any corresponding obligation to make meaningful contributions supporting Canadian programming and creators — an obligation that has long been imposed on traditional domestic broadcasters.' The government said that if the streamers get their way, that would preserve 'an inequitable circumstance in which domestic broadcasters — operating in an industry under economic strain — shoulder a disproportionate regulatory burden.' 'This result would be plainly out of step with the policy aims of Parliament' and cabinet, it added. The court hearing comes as trade tensions between the U.S. and Canada have cast a shadow over the CRTC's attempts to regulate online streamers. The regulator launched a suite of proceedings and hearings as part of its implementation of the Online Streaming Act, legislation that in 2023 updated the Broadcasting Act to set up the CRTC to regulate streaming companies. In January, as U.S. President Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term, groups representing U.S. businesses and big tech companies warned the CRTC that its efforts to modernize Canadian content rules could worsen trade relations and lead to retaliation. Then, as the CRTC launched its hearing on modernizing the definition of Canadian content in May, Netflix, Paramount and Apple cancelled their individual appearances. While the companies didn't provide a reason, the move came shortly after Trump threatened to impose a tariff of up to 100 per cent on movies made outside the United States. Foreign streamers have long pointed to their existing spending in Canada in response to calls to bring them into the regulated system. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 8, 2025.
